Information & Ethics Committee on Dec. 4th, 2014

[Charmaine Borg, NDP, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Thank you.

You said the concept of open government is 30 years old, according to your Hansard review. And we have a government that is always pledging to be open. That's a good thing, but what really matters is following through on that pledge, taking action and putting measures in place.

In an ideal world, the government would be open and information would automatically be accessible.

Do you think the number of complaints your office receives will go down? According to my calculations, it will, but I'd like to hear your thoughts on that.

[Suzanne Legault]

Yes. The theory is that enhancing the application of open government principles and increasing proactive disclosures will lead to fewer access to information requests and complaints. That is why, in Tab 5, I outlined the types of data requested within the open government context, on the one hand, and the types of data sought through ATI requests, on the other hand.

For instance, there are 200,000 pieces of geospatial data, as shown on page 1. We also have what are called open data. The last page shows the type of data people ask for through ATI requests. As you can see, the subject of the requests varies. As for whether the number of certain ATI requests will decrease as a result of data being made accessible, the answer is probably yes. In the 1990s and 2000s, numerous proactive disclosures were made with regard to travel, especially travel expenses. Then, people requested the supporting documents for the information that had been made public.

The open government initiative has been in effect for two years now. And yet we are seeing quite an increase in the number of requests and complaints. At the moment, then, the trend is not towards fewer requests but, rather, more. We'll have to see.

[Charmaine Borg, NDP, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Looking at the table makes me wonder whether we are making the right data available. It might be a good idea to examine the types of complaints and requests Canadians are making and then select other types of data that should be made available online.

Geospatial data are useful, yes, but I think the pendulum may have swung too far in that direction.

[Suzanne Legault]

I think we need to look at the types of information people are asking for through ATI requests. Some are seeking information that concerns them personally, and others are looking for information pertaining to security agencies. As I've already pointed out, we receive a lot of complaints. Half of the requests involve Citizenship and Immigration Canada. In addition, a good number of complaints relate to the Canada Border Services Agency. People want information on their border crossings so they can establish that they were residents of Canada and, as such, access certain benefits.

I can't see the government ever making that information available online, proactively. That would surprise me.

[Charmaine Borg, NDP, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Do I have any time remaining?

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

You have one minute left, Ms. Charmaine.

[Charmaine Borg, NDP, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Very well. Thank you. Now I'm going to switch topics.

We talked about the urgent need to amend the act, since it is 32 years old. You have often said—and correct me if I am putting words in your mouth—that we could end up with a broken system in need of fixing.

Aside from modernizing the act, what basic steps do we need to take to correct the deficiencies and fix our flawed system?

[Suzanne Legault]

Actually, I am quite optimistic. I am really happy with the open government initiative and the directive on open government recently implemented by the government. Under this directive, the government has made a commitment to foster a culture of open government by default. That is the first time I have seen a government make such a strong commitment to a change in culture. That is the foundation, that is what paves the way for an open government.

Then there is the need to modernize the Access to Information Act. Its implementation hinges on adequate resources and open data. Those are crucial elements for a change in culture.

Just this week, I gave a speech on the importance of changing the culture, which the government has committed to doing.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

Thank you very much, Madame Legault.

Next, we have Joan Crockatt, for the Conservatives. Welcome to the committee, Joan.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Thank you very much, and thank you very much to Suzanne Legault and Layla Michaud for being here with us today.

I appreciate your passion for information, especially having come from the newspaper business, where we rely a lot on access to information to get our information. It is something that I've been quite familiar with. Because I came from the newspaper business, I just want to draw a bit of an analogy, because the world has changed very dramatically for newspapers. If we take 1983 as a benchmark, we, in newspapers, used to consider that all the information was free and in the public domain. I don't know if you have a subscription to a newspaper now. Do you? I'm wondering if now you pay for articles that you want that are in past newspapers.

[Suzanne Legault]

Personally, no, I don't.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Okay, so why do you not pay for them?

[Suzanne Legault]

Do you mean newspaper articles?

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Yes.

[Suzanne Legault]

It hasn't occurred to me that I needed to do that. Maybe if I wanted an article, I would pay for it. I don't know. I just haven't personally done that.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

I just wanted to put the premise to you that a lot of people are going to the government now for information that they might previously have received through their newspapers; it's information that might have been printed in the past. I'm wondering if you might agree with this.

[Suzanne Legault]

I don't see all the 55,000 requests, so I really can't comment on that. From what I do see in the complaints files, it's not that type of information. It isn't.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

I think you testified that the number of access to information requests you've had has gone up by 30%. I just wanted to draw your attention to tab 4 here with regard to the requests that have been received by your office. I see some interesting ones here. While your overall access requests have gone up by 30%, the requests involving Industry Canada, which as you know is a business department, have gone up by 50.6%; the requests from Finance, 65.5%; the requests from Natural Resources Canada, 114%. I'm wondering if that might lead you to conclude that a lot of the requests that are coming in are requests from businesses, from for-profit enterprises that may be utilizing this information for profit.

[Suzanne Legault]

I really don't know. I think that we would have to go back to the departments, because these statistics are all collected from the government. These are the government's statistics. They're not my statistics. I look at them because I like to analyze the health of the system that way, and it gives me an understanding of what's going on.

Beyond going behind all of these numbers, we would have to go back to the annual reports of these institutions. If you want us to do that, we'd be more than happy to go back and look at those annual reports for those four or five departments, and I can send the information to the committee. We'd gladly do that.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

It seems to me that if you are in such dire financial straits as you have painted to us at the beginning, and I do sense your passion for freedom of information, I have to wonder why you haven't considered the fact that this access to information department was set up as an organization that was going to be in a partial cost recovery model, and that has been eroded over time. Has it not?

[Suzanne Legault]

I am not aware that the five dollars was ever meant to be a cost recovery mechanism. I am not aware that that was ever the motivation for that.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

What do you think the motivation for that was?

[Suzanne Legault]

What I hear in the system is that this is to prevent having frivolous and vexatious requesters.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Would it not make sense that we would still want to have that fee under that rationale, so that you might be prevented from having frivolous requests coming to you?

[Suzanne Legault]

I don't think putting discipline in the legislation is an appropriate mechanism. The federal Access to Information Act is one of the few pieces of legislation that actually contains no discipline regarding the number of requests that a requester can make at one time to a department or whether the requests can be considered frivolous or vexatious. Most other pieces of legislation have that. I don't think the fee is an appropriate mechanism for that.

That's my perspective when I look at how the system is working. If we were to put a cost recovery mechanism in place for access requests, what would be the fee? Would it be $10, $15, $20, $25, $100, $200, or $300? Is there a fee for a complaint? How do you assess whether a corporation has...? Is it a large corporation or a small or medium-sized corporation making the request? Is it an independent journalist making a request? Is it a journalist from a big media organization?