18 Apr Where is the NDP’s soul as it mounts a rote defence of DCS?
I have a flood of reader mail on the scandal enveloping the Department of Community Service—too much to publish more than a sample for now.
I do hope readers are not tiring of this subject. Officials of the department committed serious errors with terrible consequences—for the priest whose character they so carelessly assassinated; for the volunteer members of a board serving the community in good faith; and for the addicted men in treatment at Talbot House, who could be there now had the department’s cavalier actions not forced the closure of this community-built institution.
For decades, the Nova Scotia New Democratic Party has stood tall in its defence of people and institutions just like this. Yet this week, in response to these sickening revelations, the province’s first NDP government has managed only to mount a standard issue, generic communications strategy that denies all wrongdoing, and stonewalls the searching independent inquiry this department so badly needs. What a wasted opportunity.
I truly believe Darrell Dexter and Denise Peterson-Rafuse are better people than they have shown themselves to be in the last three days.
Martin MacKinnon writes:
Father Abbass, whom we now know to be mistakenly accused, should be reinstated with a qualified apology, as should all funding to Talbot House. By “qualified,” I mean the Department can appropriately say they are sorry it occurred, but when allegations are made, they must be investigated.
My great concern is that the Department of Community Services and Ms. [Marika] Lathem, whom I do not know, may believe they need to save face by making it sound like the allegations are partly correct. That would be a serious mistake. If there were procedural problems, they need to be fixed outside the glare of media. They do not constitute [grounds for] withdrawing funding and adversely [affecting] the good reputation of Father Abbass.
If Ms. Lathem and the Department do not come clean in the coming days, a second investigation of the Department and Ms. Lathem may be required. It will be interesting to see if she is asked to step down when such an investigation is initiated.
Denise MacLellan writes:
After reading both the DCS report and the Talbot House response, I suspect the DCS motives more than ever. I have a sneaking suspicion that someone disagreed with Fr. Abbass’s approach to recovery programs, and out came the knives. What concerns me is the ruthlessness of the DCS. What was their real purpose behind all the rhetoric? What happens to the trumped-up accusations against Abbass?
As the Board suggested, there was no real attempt to make things work on the part of the DCS, which considered Abbass guilty until proven innocent… Very underhanded, heavy-handed, and unprofessional by the DCS.