Premier Danielle Smith of Alberta has emphasized that the hiring of lawyers to manage requests from the auditor general is intended to facilitate transparency, not obstruct the ongoing investigation into multimillion-dollar health contracts. This directive instructs public servants to consult a lawyer when auditor general Doug Wylie requests an interview as part of his inquiry.
The leader of the Opposition NDP, Christina Gray, has expressed concern that this policy suggests an attempted cover-up, urging the premier to revoke what the NDP terms a “gag order.” The premier, however, refutes this accusation, asserting that the NDP is distorting the truth and that no such order exists.
Smith defends the policy by stating that it is the most efficient way to help Wylie gather the vast number of records and coordinate potentially hundreds of interviews to investigate allegations of questionable contracts. She clarified that the auditor general retains the authority to question any employee, past or present, during the investigation, while the government aims to assist in facilitating this process.
Despite these assurances, Gray criticized the government for allegedly advising employees not to respond to Wylie’s calls and questioned the claim that the process received the auditor general’s endorsement. Concerns about the transparency of this approach have also been raised by other political figures, including former infrastructure minister Peter Guthrie, who resigned over the issue. Guthrie described the involvement of lawyers in the review as “obstructionist” and supported calls for a full judicial public inquiry.
Multiple investigations, including one by the RCMP, have been initiated following a lawsuit by the former head of Alberta Health Services, who alleged wrongful dismissal for investigating alleged sweetheart deals and political interference. Both the government and Alberta Health Services contend that her dismissal was due to performance issues.
Meanwhile, the Alberta health ministry has yet to clarify whether similar directives apply to requests from Raymond Wyant, a former Manitoba judge conducting a separate investigation into health contracts. The UCP government’s handling of the matter continues to draw criticism, including a recent push by health critic Sarah Hoffman for a public inquiry, which was defeated by the UCP majority, although supported by some dissenting members.
Context and Clarity
This ongoing controversy has significant implications for Alberta’s political landscape and public trust in government operations. The involvement of legal counsel to manage communication with the auditor general raises questions about transparency and accountability in government processes. The perceived lack of openness could influence public opinion and potentially affect the political climate in Alberta.
Moreover, the allegations of questionable health contracts and political interference highlight the crucial role of oversight bodies like the auditor general in maintaining integrity within public institutions. The outcome of these investigations, whether through the existing channels or a public inquiry, will likely have lasting repercussions on governance standards and public confidence in Alberta’s health system.