Right of reply?

Nicholas Simons, the social worker who wrote the director's review into Sherry Charlie's death, is asking government for release from a confidentiality agreement that prevents him from talking about the case. That request follows Children and Family Development Minister Stan Hagen's statement that government could have "probably" chosen a better reviewer to complete the investigation, which was made public almost three years after Sherry's death. Such reviews are usually completed in two to six months. Minister Hagen was also quoted by The Times Colonist's Jeff Rud as saying Mr. Simons "to be blunt, I think got into the political aspect of this (case) even before he got elected." That's a reference to Mr. Simons's present post as a New Democrat MLA and his attempts during the investigation to look at ministry policies that might have contributed to Sherry's death, rather than focus on the practices that directly resulted in the tragedy - as is customarily the case.

Minister Hagen made those comments following the release of child and youth officer Jane Morley's report into the "timelines, changes to terms of reference, and other matters relating to" the director's review. Her report found "the story of (the review) is not a story of conspiracy and cover-up, but rather one of organizational failure." It also seemed to suggest Mr. Simons's inexperience as a reviewer may have been at least partially to blame in delaying the release of that document. Earlier, Public Eye exclusively told you the New Democrat MLA was scheduled to testify at the coroner's inquest into Sherry's death but was struck from the witness list the day before he was set to appear.


So what else is new? Stan is balking as usual. The guy who wrote the report is now a member of the opposition so let's dump on the guy as much as possible. Should Stan start commenting on the NDP MLA's competance out side the legislature he could easily get sued. In the meantime I believe most thinking people have only to look at" Stan the Man's" performance and decide for themselves that Mr. Simon's is being shat upon. If he wasn't good at his previous job, why is it that he got contracted to do the review? Maybe someone will ask Stan that question?

Yo DL...

Before posting on this topic... or ANY topic, maybe you should read the material in question.

Morely said Simons did a poor job. And that there were questions raised by the manner in which he conducted his review.

Simons wants to defend himself against Morely, not Hagen.


Morley is speaking for Hagen, Sugar. That's exactly (part of) the whole problem.

And that seems to be common practice for Hagen -- slagging people who can't respond. I've seen him do it before. One of his favourite lines in private chats with stakeholders is to dismiss any critic of MCFD as "political" or "just playing politics". He never fails to add that this is unlike himself, since although he's an MLA and a Minister, he's "not political" and doesn't "play politics".

He's a "hollow" laugh a minute -- a hoot! -- is our Hagen!

Leave a comment

Copyright © 2004 - Public Eye Mediaworks. Reproductions of any portion of this Website are permitted only with the expressed permission of Public Eye Mediaworks.
Canadian Web Hosting graciously provided by dotcanuck Web Services. Layout and graphics courtesy of Art Department Design.