Global Affairs Canada misconduct complaints have more than doubled since 2023
Global Affairs Canada’s latest report on addressing misconduct and wrongdoing in the department details dozens of cases of financial mismanagement, sexual harassment, violence, and breaches in ethics, with 22 cases resulting in public servants losing their jobs.
Since the inaugural report in 2022-23, “founded” instances of misconduct and wrongdoing have more than doubled. In 2024-25, Global Affairs Canada (GAC) reported a total of 120 cases resulting in discipline, up from 94 in 2023-24, and 56 in 2022-23.
The July 14 report represents the third year GAC has released the annual update, which aims to increase transparency on how misconduct and wrongdoing are addressed in the department. In the last fiscal year, the department documented 218 complaints or allegations, of which 125 were investigated and only five were considered unfounded. GAC employs more than 7,500 people in Canada, and about 5,500 “locally-engaged staff” in 181 missions in 112 countries.
The document’s introductory message, signed by deputy ministers David Morrison, Rob Stewart, Christopher MacLennan, and associate deputy minister Sandra McCardell, suggested the earlier publications “may have contributed to an increase in the reporting of potential misconduct and wrongdoing, which would be an indicator of our employees’ increasing trust in our departmental ability to identify and address problematic behaviour.”
The misconduct and wrongdoing report is part of the effort to transform the department’s organizational culture, the senior ranking officials say.
“The conversations generated by these reports have also contributed to a broader reflection on how we, as public servants, embody our values and ethics in our work.”
Of the 120 founded cases in 2024-25, 70 involved a breach in the department’s values and ethics code, 31 cases were about misconduct and inappropriate behaviour, nine cases regarded financial mismanagement, five cases were about harassment and violence, and four were personnel security violations.
Those cases resulted in seven verbal reprimands, 42 written reprimands, 22 temporary suspensions, 11 training requirements, and 22 terminations. In 24 cases, the consequences are listed as “other,” which includes letter of expectations, resignations submitted before disciplinary steps were taken, and additional administrative measures. In some cases, multiple administrative or disciplinary measures were imposed on the same employee.
GAC did not provide comment on the report by press deadline.
Financial mismanagement, intoxication, sexual harassment
In one instance of financial mismanagement, an employee was fired after seven years of submitting falsified receipts and fraudulent claim allowances, showing “a clear lack of integrity, and resulted in financial losses to the department.”
In another case, an employee used their official position with GAC to over-pay “locally engaged” staff over nearly four years. The employee then told the local staff to return the excess payments directly to them. The employee pocketed the money.
“The employee’s actions demonstrated a serious breach of integrity and resulted in financial losses for the department. Consequently, the employee’s employment was terminated,” the report reads, adding the department is taking legal steps to recover the money.
Another GAC staffmember working at one of Canada’s missions abroad—the location was not specified—got drunk at a bar, was escorted home by police, and was verbally aggressive to police and a security guard at their residence. For this, they received a written reprimand, “considering mitigating factors,” which the report did not include.
One employee received a written reprimand after physically assaulting a colleague at an event outside of work. The report says the punishment was doled out due to “mitigating factors” including remorse and a lack of previous disciplinary issues, as well as “the existence of some provocation.”
In another case, an executive in one of Canada’s missions abroad made inappropriate sexual comments towards staff at the mission. The investigation also found that the executive made unwanted sexual advances, inappropriate gestures, and inappropriately stared at employees. The report doesn’t specify the punishment in this case.
Another employee showed “inappropriate sexual behaviour” toward female hotel staff during a training session, and was temporarily suspended.
One employee received a written reprimand for making inappropriate remarks regarding a colleague’s sexual orientation, criticizing their demeanour, appearance, and financial status. This person also restricted their colleague from leaving the office during a discussion.
One staff member was fired for making “multiple inappropriate sexual behaviours and communications towards several female colleagues.” Another was temporarily suspended for making “repeated” sexual and racially insensitive remarks to an employee they supervised.
One manager faced what was described as “prolonged psychological violence and harassment” from a former employee. This former staff member undermined the manager in front of clients, colleagues, external stakeholders, and superiors, and also spoke negatively about the manager to their superiors. The investigation concluded that the lack of intervention by senior management and the departmental labour relations/human resources unit were secondary root causes for the failure to take proper action.
Another employee was “very active on social media” and shared comments that could be perceived as critical by a local foreign government, potentially affecting that mission’s reputation. An investigation uncovered multiple additional instances of misconduct, and this person was fired.
One employee was temporarily suspended for forging a confirmation of employment letter and using an official stamp without authorization.
Another staff member deliberately manipulated documented information to negatively impact a colleague’s performance at work, and was given a written reprimand.
Report can be used as a learning tool
The grim update was celebrated by one expert in professional and applied ethics as an exercise in public accountability.
“I think if a government department, such as Global Affairs, takes ethics seriously, then accountability is a good place to start,” said Arthur Schafer, a professor and founding director of the Centre for Professional and Applied Ethics at the University of Manitoba.
“They’re saying ‘OK, we’re taking it seriously. Here’s where we went wrong last year. Here are the kinds of cases by which we dealt. Here is the range of disciplinary action we took in response to various kinds of inappropriate behaviour, or unprofessional behaviour, or breaches of integrity.’”
“This kind of openness—you could call it transparency, accountability—forms a good basis on which to create an ethical culture within the department.”
Publishing the report on misconduct publicly could be an educational tool for GAC’s 13,000 employees, Schafer said, by outlining various examples of inappropriate conduct.
It would be an even more valuable learning tool if it were interspersed with case studies, he said.
“I think it would be more likely to grab the imagination of civil servants, and influence their pattern of behaviour, if there were more granular details, if it weren’t so abstract,” he said. “I think that it would have an even greater educational effect, and I think it might have a more powerful deterrent effect.”
The report can also act as a deterrent, Schafer added, as it’s a “strong signal” to staff that ethics are taken seriously, and breaches will be investigated.
“I think that’s an important message,” he said. “This kind of openness, transparency, accountability, forms a good basis on which to create an ethical culture within the department.”
mglass@hilltimes.com
The Hill Times
LICENSING
PODCAST
ALERTS
