This is certainly not pertaining to this intervention that you're here for today, but I've heard the term “administrative sabotage”, and I certainly don't place that on your office. It's the way in which, across the whole of government or in government arm's-length institutions, there is a skirting of the laws.
In fact, a story published on October 4 has a headline that says, “'We're ashamed': Canada's information watchdogs sign joint pact, urging governments to fix FOI systems”. I'm just going to quote a couple of things, and then I'm going to invite you to respond, if that's okay.
The Globe's report that launched, called “Secret Canada”, has revealed that public institutions “skirt access laws, also known as freedom of information laws, by overusing redactions, failing to meet legislated timelines and claiming 'no records'”.
That's even when, in fact, they do exist. This is what I reference when I say “administrative sabotage”.
I believe you signed on to the resolution, and I'll allow you to speak to it in a moment. The report continues:
The resolution calls on governments to uphold seven “principles” related to the public's right to know. Chief among them is the idea that the culture of public institutions “must be founded on the fundamental principle that information under their control belongs to the people they serve.”
I won't reference the entire article. I'm sure you're familiar with it and probably have prepared to comment on it coming into this, given that this story broke just a few weeks back. I will allow for you to address that now and maybe just provide a context for how you feel that this resolution impacts the work you're able to do moving forward.