Nova Scotia Justice Minister Mark Furey's role in shaping a promised joint public inquiry into April’s mass shooting puts the former RCMP officer in a conflict of interest and it’s past time he removes himself from the process, says Tory Leader Tim Houston.
Houston said on Wednesday he thought Furey would have excused himself "at some point in the process.”
On the same day, Houston wrote a letter to Public Safety Minister Bill Blair urging the government to release the terms of reference for the inquiry and that those parameters allow for a broad examination of key factors contributing to the country’s deadliest mass shooting.
The letter points to the public backlash both governments faced after their initial decision to conduct a closed-door review of the mass shooting. After massive backlash, the federal government announced there would be a public inquiry.
Neither the province nor the federal government have since said when the terms of reference would be released or if they would mirror those in the initial review.
Houston said in his letter to Blair that he had written to the province's conflict of interest commissioner to investigate whether Minister Mark Furey’s previous role in the RCMP is at odds with his current role as Minister of the Crown as it relates to the inquiry.
Tim Houston to Hon. Joseph P. Kennedy July 31, 2020
Houston told The Chronicle Herald that he had since received a response from the commissioner saying his office is considering the request.
“Is the minister conflicted? It’s certainly been a question that I’ve had," said Houston. "It’s a question that many Nova Scotians have had.”
“If we’re going to have faith in the process we need to have an answer to that question.”
Normally government officials formally ask the commissioner to make an opinion on whether a matter constitutes a conflict of interest but the commissioner has the power to investigate potential conflicts.
The Conflict of Interest Act states that when a government minister is in a position of having to make a decision on a matter and is in a conflict or there is "a reasonable perception of a conflict of interest” the case needs to be reported to government cabinet. Cabinet may select someone to replace the minister.
Wayne MacKay, a Dalhousie University law professor, also believes that Furey should excuse himself from the public inquiry process largely because there’s a public perception that the minister is in a conflict.
MacKay said the basis for such a conclusion is legitimate given that the minister is a retired RCMP officer who spent more than 30 years in the force. But also because of the minister’s “apparent role” in promoting the initial secretive review process.
There’s reasonable evidence to suggest Furey's interest is in narrowing the mandate of the public inquiry, said MacKay.
“I agree with Houston because the problem is the perception and the perception is out there in many quarters that the review process was not entirely above board," said MacKay. "If the same players are involved in this new round there might be the same perception.”
At a minimum, Furey should get an opinion from the conflict commissioner, said MacKay
He also said the same conflict concerns apply to Minister Blair, who’s also a former police officer.
Houston’s letter to Blair includes several recommendations for what should be included in the inquiry's terms of reference. Those include examining the roles, responsibilities, and actions of the RCMP related to the events of the shooting, along with a broader review of the related policies that led to any decisions that were made.
The letter asks that the probe examine reports that the gunman was a confidential RCMP informant. Other recommendations include probing provincial procedures on the province's emergency alert system as well as the impact of domestic violence on the incident, and a broader review of domestic violence in Nova Scotia.
Houston also wants the composition of the panel to be changed from three members to five members, with at least three residing out of province.
“It is essential that this inquiry be conducted by an independent and impartial body, free of bias or political interference," states the letter. "It is only through this elevated level of transparency that the public will have confidence in the process, and that the findings that will result in real and meaningful change."
Houston said given the concern about the process so far, he’s taking nothing for granted and that the party wanted to make sure the its voice is heard.
"We don’t want to assume anything. So now both governments conceded to public pressure, we need to get the inquiry that we’re expecting, that it’s broad and it’s based here in the province."
The Herald inquired with the Department of Justice about whether Furey is considering seeking the opinion of the conflict of interest commissioner and when the terms of reference would be released. But the department replied with a vague response.
"The Department of Justice is always mindful of any perceived or potential conflict of interest as part of its work," said the statement. "When asked last year about potential conflicts, the Office of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner advised simply having been a member of the RCMP does not create a conflict of interest."
The statement said the province is currently working with the federal government to establish the public inquiry, which includes establishing the terms of reference.
The Department of Public Safety was also vague in its response and didn’t say when the terms of reference would be released.
The Herald asked whether Blair supports Furey reaching out to the commissioner. A release issued by the department said "victims, families, advocates, and communities impacted by the tragedy that took place on April 18 and 19, 2020 deserve answers, and we will do what is necessary to ensure an event such as this will never happen again."
It also said the chairpeople of the inquiry will determine the scope, focal points and scale of the inquiry.
"Throughout this process, it is our sincere hope that the terrible tragedy of April 18 and 19 will be fully examined and that all relevant facts and evidence will be made public.”
