The bandwagon of individuals and organizations calling for a full-fledged public inquiry into former Alberta Health Services CEO Stephen Duckett’s allegations of queue jumping is growing larger and louder every day. Yet any such exercise will become a political circus without first determining, much like the police do when allegations of a criminal offence are made, whether or not there is evidence warranting such a high-profile step.
Duckett’s speech in Toronto, in which he implied individuals in government had access to certain “go-to” people in the former regional health authorities they could contact to move up the waiting list for surgeries, has become the newest health care story out of the legislature. Yet despite Duckett’s 2009 memo in which he tries to put a stop to the practice and a leaked internal PowerPoint presentation discussing queue-jumping, we have not yet heard of a single instance in which one person was shuttled up the list because of political connections, wealth or profile.
If true, Duckett’s allegations are another significant symptom that our health care system, especially within Alberta, is fundamentally broken. But Duckett has offered no names, no dates and no solid, concrete evidence to warrant a full-blown public inquiry. While that possibility should not be discounted, it seems paramount that some substance be put to Duckett’s allegations before throwing open the doors of a potential political nightmare.
Coming events in Alberta’s political world have the potential to turn such an investigation into a political lightning rod that will be unable to objectively solicit the information it needs. The Tories are hunting for Premier Ed Stelmach’s successor as he will step down from office in October. There has been speculation from political commentators that the winner of the Tory leadership could call for a snap election in a bid to “seek a mandate from the people.” Stepping into a public inquiry at this point would be foolhardy and injurious to the process because of the way the changing political landscape could treat it.
Had Duckett’s memo pointed fingers at the individuals who have engaged in this practice, a public inquiry would be a given. But this is a man with an axe to grind, run out of office for behaving poorly in front of the press, who has suddenly found the guts to speak out. While there is no reason to believe he is lying, we cannot simply launch a public inquiry based on one vague speech and two equally general documents.
Before the federal government called for a public inquiry into the circumstances of the 1985 Air India bombing, which killed 329 people, most of them Canadian, it asked former Ontario premier Bob Rae to conduct a preliminary investigation to determine whether or not a commission of inquiry was necessary. Based on Rae’s findings, in 2006 the government appointed former Supreme Court Justice John Major to conduct that inquiry.
A preliminary investigation is what is needed here before proceeding any further. A probe on the part of a respected, unbiased individual or group of individuals can help the government determine whether or not a commission of inquiry is even needed in this case. If that person or group can find instances supporting Duckett’s claims, then an inquiry should proceed. Otherwise the entire province is just dancing to the tune of an individual who lost his job.
Perhaps while they have the time, the investigator or investigating body could examine why we even have queues in the first place and suggest some ideas for eliminating them entirely. Then we won’t have to worry about anyone jumping them.
