By Owain Johnston-Barnes

Home Affairs Minister Michael Fahy has accused the Ombudsman’s office of maladministration, labelling a critical report a “farce”.

He also declined to name the employer or agent involved in the controversy, arguing that it would be unfair given that the Ombudsman chose not to name the complainant.

The report, released on Friday, detailed a complaint from a woman, identified only as a Bermudian professional, against the Department of Immigration and the Ministry of Home Affairs.

She had said an employer had failed to contact her three months after she applied for a job, and was informed that a work permit had been issued.

The Department questioned the company, and had been informed that no Bermudians had applied for the advertised position.

Ombudsman Victoria Pearman’s report found that the employer’s mailbox was closed a day before the advertised deadline and, while the Department had recommended the associated work permit be revoked, the Minister decided against this.

She then made several recommendations, including that the Department provide a without prejudice apology and detail the reasons for the Minister’s decision.

Sen Fahy said yesterday that after receiving the information from staff, he had contacted the employer’s agent and determined that the early closing of the address was accidental.

He also came to the conclusion that the professional did not have the required qualifications or experience.

He further said there was no legal requirement to provide reasons for his decision under law and it has never been the policy of the department to give reasons about the issuance or non-issuance of a work permit to an unrelated third party.

“It would be a breach of confidentiality to do so,” he said. “Further, as regards recommendations made to me by technical officers, such documents are not disclosed to anyone. Not employers, employees or applicants. No one. They never have been.”

He said that he gave directions to the department to watch how the employer conducts itself when the work permit expires before the Ombudsman issued her recommendations, and that the department had taken on board a recommendation that advertisements be rendered invalid if closing dates or addresses are changed. The policy was included in the new work permit policy, which came into effect on March 1.

Meanwhile Sen Fahy criticised the Ombudsman’s decision to include the complainant in on the message detailing her recommendations — something he called a blatant attempt to bind the Ministry to the recommendations — and said Ms Pearman had made “personal remarks” about him to staff.

A message sent to Ms Pearman by Chief Immigration Officer Danette Ming — released by Sen Fahy — stated that the department had recommended Ms Pearman meet with the Minister but she refused, “intimating that there was a historical matter” that may have prevented her from arranging the meeting.

The message also suggested the Ombudsman’s inclusion of the complainant in messages to the department was itself maladministration.

Dr Ming wrote: “We find it curious and odd that the complainant was directly copied in correspondence addressed to the department. Our records show that for no other investigations by you (and of the former Ombudsman) that at no time has a complainant been included in a letter with contents of findings and recommendations (historically, complainants are written to separately).

“Removing the opportunity for the department to consider your findings and recommendations and provide feedback before you communicated information to the complainant is clearly maladministration.”

Sen Fahy continued, stating: “The department did all that was required to ascertain with the employer whether a Bermudian applied for the advertised position. Because of the fact that I had concerns with the issue I made direct inquiries and made the determinations I did.

“I therefore disagree with the Ombudsman’s claim that the department ‘is responsible for failing the professional by not giving sufficient regard to the information she provided, not adequately addressing her complaint in a timely manner and not ensuring compliance with its policies.

“In short, the report is a farce and in fact relates to matters that happened over two years ago. Significant strides have been made in the department since then, including a new work permit policy and a civil penalty regime with literally dozens of cases being investigated and being dealt with by the chief immigration officer and her team.

“The department is one of the busiest in Bermuda and will not always get everything right, but I have confidence in my team and their abilities. The issues raised by the Ombudsman are not reflective of the actual working of the department and are rejected.”

While Shadow Immigration Minister Walton Brown had called on Government to name the company involved in the allegations, Sen Fahy declined, saying: “In this particular instance the Ombudsman made the determination to not name the professional. If you’re not naming the professional I don’t think you should be naming either the agent or the employer. If people with to have their names disclosed, then they should let me know but at this time I’m following what the Ombudsman did.”