Judgemental Errors

What's this? Prime Minister Stephen Harper responding to an enquiry about the hiring of a former senior aide, confessing that he had not previously known the full extent of Bruce Carson's work history, criminal history and mental-health record? How could he not have been advised?

When hiring is done in the Prime Minister's Office aren't the usual security checks performed? They are, after all, for ordinary workers taking employment anywhere in the civil service, inclusive of contract workers employed in the Parliamentary Precinct and elsewhere in the National Capital.

Would not the Prime Minister himself, much less his senior administrators insist that such background checks be routinely undertaken? To ensure that they are not saddled with someone whose background could prove controversial at some future date?

All these questions and so few palatable answers. For a background check of some dimension was surely undertaken.

"I'm learning these things as well. Let me be very clear about the situation: I knew that Mr. Carson had had difficulties with the law many, many years ago. Some 25 years ago. After that, he had had a good employment record." Sounds feasible. Other than representing as a mild reproach that his own integrity has been questioned. But does this represent due diligence?

The man was convicted of no fewer than five counts of fraud. All of this and more is claimed by Mr. Carson's lawyer to have been revealed during a government security check. Presumably the very one that got this man hired into responsible government positions before he was brought into the Prime Minister's official inner sanctorum as a trusted adviser.

The fraud charges that led to convictions occurred in 1990. Not all that long ago, actually. Two banks had been defrauded as well as a car rental company. Mr. Carson was ordered to seek psychiatric treatment. He was placed on two years' probation. He had a responsible position as a researcher with the Parliamentary Library, a very nice place to work, well-remunerated with ample additional benefits.

It was only with the later revelations through a news expose from an aboriginal news source that Mr. Carson had some unsavoury connections and a suspicion of illicit lobbying that the PMO asked the RCMP to investigate. The Prime Minister did better to issue a mea culpa rather than an excuse for lack of due diligence as in:

"The fact is, I did not know about these revelations that we're finding out today. I don't know why I did not know. Obviously, we're going to have to go back and look at our system ... had I known these things, obviously, I would not have hired him."

The situation demonstrates several things; that no one is exempt from errors in judgement, and that such errors in judgement lead to questions about one's judgemental capabilities.