1 week Ago By Michele Jarvie
The Alberta government’s latest move — forcing AHS leadership to participate in court filings to discredit its fired CEO — should concern every Albertan. It sends a chilling message to health-care workers: speaking out will result in job loss and protracted legal retaliation. This isn’t just about one case or one individual; it highlights broader issues of transparency, accountability and trust in Alberta’s government officials, and its tightly shackled health-care system.
The government’s ongoing insistence on multiple investigations into the private surgical contracts is an attempt to obscure the full picture. With multiple separate, disconnected investigations, no individual investigation can see beyond its own limited scope. It is reminiscent of the parable of the blind men and the elephant — each perceiving only a fragment of reality, ensuring that no one investigation can grasp the whole truth.
Critical limitations of each investigation warrant mention. The AHS internal review is overseen by government-appointed bureaucrats in acting AHS leadership positions — casting doubt that it will be an independent review. The government’s inclusion of AHS leadership in the ongoing attempt to discredit the former CEO, Athana Mentzelopoulos — who initiated an internal review of the contracting out processes in the first place — contributes to a culture that is simply unjust.
The dissolution of the AHS board just before it was to receive the external forensic audit eliminated a crucial check and balance. The board had a legal duty to report fraudulent or criminal activity if found. Without a board, the government can manage AHS audit findings without an obligation to publicly disclose or act upon them.
Who knows when the auditor general report will be released? The auditor’s investigation into the separate DynaLife debacle remains incomplete two years in. Doug Wylie has already admitted that his office cannot assess the entirety of the new procurement allegations given the narrow terms of reference and his constrained resources. In times of ever-growing financial pressures and ongoing cuts to front-line health-care spending, can we afford to wait years to learn if taxpayer dollars are being woefully misspent on chartered surgical facilities? The RCMP’s role is similarly constrained.
Their investigation, appropriately conducted in secrecy, focuses only on criminal activity. Government interference could be identified, but it would remain unreported if it does not meet the strict legal definition of a crime. Lastly, Judge Raymond Wyant’s review of AHS procurement processes raises questions.
It is unclear whether he has the authority to investigate key concerns, such as inflated contracts compared to AHS hospital rates, the interplay of hospital overcrowding and workforce issues on surgical volumes, or intimidation and pressure tactics from government to rubber-stamp sole-source contracts. Without the ability to compel testimony, key witnesses — both in government and in health care — may remain silent to protect their jobs and livelihoods..
