2012-01-20 13:33 PST
Letter to the Editor,
Regarding your article on a psychologist who was contracted by the RCMP some time ago and failed to return medical files, I would like to kindly suggest that when you report negatively on an organization, you consider actually speaking to someone from that organization. I had naively believed that was a part of normal journalistic practice but since reading your article I see that is not the case.
Had you spoken to us, we would have told you that the safe and the medical files contained within are in an alarmed location with a medical practitioner who is bound by his profession's standards as well as, potentially, the Security of Information Act, the Access to Information Act, the Privacy Act and/or other Acts of Parliament.
We would have also informed you that the security provisions apply both during and after one's service with the RCMP and that there is an onus on all employees and those contracted to work for us to immediately return classified or protected information. Everyone who is security cleared to work for us signs that they both understand and agree to comply with the legal and administrative requirements.
Before publishing an article, maybe conduct some research as it may assist in providing your readers the necessary facts to enable them to make up their own minds - instead of being unknowingly led down a path already decided upon by the reporter.
Supt Ray Bernoties
Officer in Charge
BC RCMP Communications