Tax dollars and resources meant to help
children are being squandered by
Ontario’s Children’s Lawyer in efforts which ultimately harm the interests
of children and of Justice in
Ontario.
Under legislation in Ontario, the Office of
the Children’s lawyer (OCL) is the taxpayer-funded
agency which is appointed to represent the interests of children in many
family court proceedings.
While most taxpayers would expect this
government agency, with its
lawyers and social workers, to
spend tax resources in a manner which would best help children and promote
justice in an open and accountable manner, evidence would reasonably
indicate that this agency is often failing in these objectives.

The person assigned the
responsibility of managing this
taxpayer-funded agency is Ms. Claire E. Burns, a lawyer who also serves as
the Vice-Chancellor of the Anglican Diocese of Toronto.
Analysis
of documents and testimony from the very children and families which the
OCL is supposed to be helping, reveal that significant problems continue
to plague this agency and that significant changes are required to repair
the serious flaws in the way in which this government agency operates
under the direction of Ms. Burns.
Of
significant concern is that a number of children and parents who have had
dealings with the OCL state that their
experience has not been a good one.
Many say
that they do not trust the OCL or its workers and report that they have
been harmed by the agency.
Some
children report that OCL workers showed clear signs of bias against one of
their parents and that they did not think this fair while some others
reported that they wished they had a recording of their meeting with the
OCL worker so that the workers could be exposed for lying.
While Ms.
Burns has been questioned as to why she does not support the concept of
having OCL workers simply employ the use of audio recording devices to
maintain accurate records, Ms. Burns has stated on the record that the
recording of meetings with children by her staff will cause the children
harm.
Yet the
Supreme Court of Canada has disagreed with Ms. Burns and has stated that the recording
of children’s testimony for court purposes is a most reliable form of
record keeping. Police routinely
record children's testimony as
well, especially when interviewing
them during investigations involving sexual assault or domestic violence.
Yet even
when children say they wish to have their meetings with OCL workers
recorded they are refused this option.
One
13-year-old from the Barrie, Ontario area told the Canada Court
Watch group during a videotaped
interview that she caught the OCL lawyer attempting to record her but that
the lawyer lied to her about this when she asked.
By far,
the most common and alarming complaint voiced by child clients of OCL is
that their lawyers fail to make their wishes properly known to the court
and that OCL workers use leading questions and coercive questioning
techniques during meetings. Children
have reported being completely ignored by their lawyers and their wishes and
opinions are never heard by the court at all.
One child
informed her mother that she had not seen her lawyer in over a year and that during
a subsequent telephone call to an administrative assistant at the OCL, the
parent was told that the file had been closed some time before.
Yet, according to the parents, in spite of the child being
told that she no longer had a lawyer, the lawyer continued to attend court
appearances afterwards and to “speak to the child’s wishes” in court.
Given
that this lawyer had no contact with the child it is difficult to imagine
how the lawyer in question was able to determine the child’s wishes
without actually speaking to the child.
It would be reasonable to assume that the taxpayers of
Ontario were paying for this lawyer when she did go to court as it is
unlikely that she went to for free.
Last month, one parent from Halton, Ontario reported that
he was concerned that the OCL lawyer for his daughter had billed the
Ontario government for services which his daughter had not received.
The
15-year-old girl involved testified in a videotaped interview that she did
not trust her OCL lawyer and that she felt that he had been “useless.”
Currently,
there appears to be no reliable method which would allow clients to verify
the billable hours charged to the taxpayers for services provided to
children being represented by the OCL with some saying that the OCL
billing process lacks transparency and could be easily abused.
The
Office of the Children’s Lawyer also employs clinical investigators that
that are assigned to conduct assessments and provide reports during high
conflict custody and access cases.
In some cases, OCL workers are refusing to provide any
written documentation as to work they have done and in some cases where
reports are provided, serious flaws can be found with the manner that
evidence is gathered and with its accuracy.
A report
from a clinical investigator from the OCL was submitted as evidence in a
recent high profile case in Newmarket, Ontario which related to the health
and welfare of two morbidly obese children.
When the
OCL investigator was cross examined at trial on the content of the report,
it was admitted that this OCL worker had failed to interview any of the
collateral contacts provided by the father and had refused to review
crucial medical evidence provided by the father relating to the weight of
the children.
Simply,
the OCL worker had failed to exercise due diligence in the gathering and
reporting of the facts.
Significant tax dollars are being paid out to so called, “clinical
investigators” from the OCL to produce what many parents and even
professionals say are highly flawed and unprofessional reports with many
of these reports costing thousands of dollars in each case.
In another case, OCL workers demanded that a videotape of
an 11-year old disclosing that he was being coerced by his children’s
lawyer child be destroyed.
Just last
week in a Hamilton courtroom packed with media representatives from all
over the Province, Ms. Burns singled out the media representative
from Canada Court Watch and immediately asked the court to exclude Court
Watch from observing the proceedings, involving a young leukemia
patient apprehended from his parents by the Children’s Aid Society in
Hamilton.
Ms. Burns
wasted the court’s valuable time and that of many other people to exclude
Canada Court Watch in spite of the fact that this individual held valid
press credentials and despite the fact that a court had ruled against the
OCL in a previous court on this identical issue. Most
believe that the real intentions of Ms. Burns were to silence those who
dare to criticize her agency.
Ms.
Burn’s efforts to muzzle Canada Court Watch would indicate that she has
more interest in keeping her agency unaccountable and that she holds
little respect for the fundamental role that the media play in protecting
the public’s interest in the administration of justice.
The entire court was forced to sit and listen to arguments
that had absolutely nothing to do with the best interests of the child and
everything to do with Ms. Burns own personal agenda to stifle those who
dare expose the failures of her agency.
Already
distraught at having their seriously ill child apprehended these poor
parents were forced to watch as Ms. Burns turned their child protection
hearing into a personal attack against Canada Court
Watch.
It was a
good example of Ms. Burns wasting tax dollars to lessen transparency and
accountability.
Ms. Burns
and her agency are supposed to be focusing their energies on providing
legal services to vulnerable children and to do this job in a most
efficient and transparent manner, not squandering tax dollars for the
purpose of muzzling criticism of their agency.
As a
government funded agency, the OCL should be placing the interests of
children and families first, not the interests of its lawyers and social
workers.
Disturbing complaints which continue to arise about the OCL raise serious
questions as to the ability and willingness of its director, Ms. Claire
Burns, to find solutions to these repetitive problems.
The
Auditor General of Ontario, Mr. McCarter who delivered a scathing report
after conducting his value for dollars audit on the spending habits of CAS
agencies might be well advised to review the financial records of the OCL
sooner than later before more children are adversely affected by the
actions of the Office of the Children’s Lawyer.