Government Operations committee  I think one thing that has to be underscored is that we don't have an appeal right. We don't review the decisions of another body. What we would do is look at the decision to see if there's anything that has not been dealt with that is just residual, that could trigger our jurisdiction to ensure that the issue is properly dealt with.

Government Operations committee  We can certainly do our very best given the nature of the files. I could also point out that we have also had cases in which some reprisal complainant, who has an active grievance, has withdrawn the grievance, leaving us in a situation where we no longer have to face that prohibition.

Government Operations committee  I'll do my best. I was not the decision-maker for Mr. Garrett's file when the decision was made. I certainly understand that Mr. Garrett has endured a difficult situation, a situation from my understanding that has multiple components. There were contract issues as well as occupational health and safety concerns that both fall under the Canada Labour Code and provincial legislation, and the B.C.

Government Operations committee  For the record, never by the commissioner's office.

Government Operations committee  Mr. Radford.

Government Operations committee  Yes, I think it's about respecting the choice of the whistle-blower. That goes to, for example, as we were just talking about, conciliation with reprisal victims on the reprisal side of the ledger. If a reprisal victim or a reprisal complainant is making an informed decision to settle, that it is the right thing for them at this time, I question that choice, but I respect it after I question it.

Government Operations committee  Sorry for the length of my response.

Government Operations committee  Yes, at law.

Government Operations committee  If we remain focused on a whistle-blower-centred model that says, if that person has reasonable belief in the truth of what he or she is coming forward with.... They can be mistaken, as we all make mistakes and we can all be wrong, but if they have reasonable belief in the truth of what they're coming forward with, to me that settles it.

Government Operations committee  It shows that the independence of my office is important.

Government Operations committee  When a whistle-blower comes forward—and our act specifically says the whistle-blower has to bring as much information as possible—we then take it from that person on behalf of the public interest. If the whistle-blower wants to disappear, they can, and many do. They say, “Here's the problem.

Government Operations committee  My remarks were in specific respect to recommendations I had made in a case report that I tabled with Parliament. That involved allegations of harassment in which I found that a deputy minister and a senior official had essentially gone around the existing procedures. That was the nature of the wrongdoing, so my recommendation for corrective action was that when harassment cases are brought against a senior official, departments should consider not dealing with that internally.

Government Operations committee  The act currently identifies who you can go to. As I said earlier, one of my proposals is to broaden that, giving express flexibility to a whistle-blower, given that the types of cases that people come forward with and the types of people who come forward are so varied and so different.

Government Operations committee  We do not mediate wrongdoing.

Government Operations committee  All reprisal issues are labour relations issues, although not all labour relations issues are reprisals. That's like a settlement of a grievance, for example—