National Defence Committee on Feb. 12th, 2024

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ms. Lambropoulos.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

I was rather hoping to get through this hour without a point of order.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Chair, the minister asked me to submit documentation on outstanding ATIPs. I want to make sure he knows that I have sent those ATIP requests—six of them dated between October 13, 2017, and April 10, 2019—to his office. His director of parliamentary affairs has already acknowledged receipt. We've also sent a copy to the clerk.

I'd encourage any parliamentarians out there, or journalists in particular, if they have any outstanding ATIPs, to bring those to our attention so we can properly do our study on what's not getting done.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Thanks very much for your timely response.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Bezan.

That was actually a point of order. That was remarkable.

That brings our first hour to a conclusion. We thank the minister for his appearance. We're pleased to see him in healthy fighting form, and we hope that continues.

With that, we're suspended for a few minutes while we re-empanel.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

I bring this meeting back to order for the second hour.

I'm assuming, Mr. Matthews, that you have no other statement. If you do, you're more than welcome to give it.

[Bill Matthews]

I wouldn't call it an opening statement, Chair.

Given that there were questions about 2019-20 and why it was not in the annual reports, I'll note that's a standard format for ATIP reports for that period. I had indicated for a question that I believe there was a degradation of response time during that period and I am indeed correct. During 2019-20, 1900 ATIPs were received and 1300 closed, so a gap of about 600. The backlog went the wrong way during that year.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

With that, we'll start our six-minute round with Mrs. Gallant.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

This was reported in the Ottawa Citizen:

National Defence has changed the process of responding to access to information requests and is now ignoring legal requirements to notify applicants if and when records will be released, according to documents and complaints from the public.

Who gave the order to disregard legal requirements to notify applicants if and when records will be released, according to the documents and complaints from the public?

[Bill Matthews]

I'm not aware of any order to disregard legal obligations. That sounds like a dangerous thing to do.

We are changing the ATIP process. The minister touched on how we digitize and manage them, so there is a change to process, but no order was given around not respecting legal obligations.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Since you have acquired a new minister, what steps has he taken to ensure that material requested is provided within 30 working days?

[Bill Matthews]

Managing the response backlog to ATIPs is, frankly, my responsibility. I have engaged the minister on the process changes we have under way. His direction to me was that we need to do more, so we have talked about making additional changes. He highlighted those for the committee earlier during his testimony.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

What steps have you taken on the minister's behalf to ensure that those submitting ATIs are provided with valid reasons for why more time is needed?

[Bill Matthews]

There are a couple of steps. It's a bit of a long answer. I apologize, Mr. Chair.

It starts with training and people understanding their obligations, but also proper record-keeping. If we were in a world where everything was digital and people dealt with information as it came in, that would allow the recipients of the ATIP requests, once they leave the corporate secretary's office, to provide information more quickly for review.

We are in a world of chasing down manual records and of new people in jobs. Sometimes cleaning up someone else's work takes longer than it does to go through your own work, and that's why we need to digitize.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Would you please walk me through the steps that are taken on your department's behalf from the time an ATIP is received? What happens? Where does it go?

[Bill Matthews]

I will start, but my colleague Ms. Paxton will have to help me out.

Number one, when an ATIP request is received, there is a quick look for clarity. If the request is not clear, sometimes there is a back-and-forth with the requester to see if we can get a clearer request. If it's clear, it will then get assigned to the responsible ADM groups. They would be finance, procurement or HR, and on the military side, they would be the air force, the navy, etc.

There will be an ongoing dialogue if there are anticipated problems with the request—that is, the volume is so big that we might require an extension. That will come back through Taylor's team, and she will work to help try to find a solution, acknowledging the challenge we face.

Taylor, is there anything you wish to add?

[Taylor Paxton, Corporate Secretary, Department of National Defence]

Our team works really diligently to collate all of the information we receive, and that is a lot of information from time to time depending on the request we have in our hands. We work really hard to ensure that we can get that done in a timely manner. Sometimes it takes longer than the 30 days.

[Bill Matthews]

A final point for me here is that when the information comes in from the various organizations—and it's often multiple—they may have done their own redacting based on what is confidential, secret, etc. The corporate secretary's team will also look at it both ways. Is it an appropriate redaction or are there things they have missed that need to be redacted according to the act? There is a review led by Ms. Paxton's team once the information comes back into her office.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

How is it decided what needs to be redacted for security reasons versus what is redacted for political reasons to cover for ministers—

[Bill Matthews]

If you look—

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

—or generals, for that matter, somebody in the chain of command?

[Bill Matthews]

The legislation is our guide here. The criteria for exemptions are pretty clear. Personal information, damage to Canada's reputation from an international affairs perspective, advice to ministers, proprietary third party information—which is the most interesting one and we should talk about—and cabinet confidence are the guidelines we use. There is nothing to do with embarrassment or awkwardness to an individual. That is not a criteria used.

The proprietary third party information is interesting because we will consult with our industry partners on that. They, by default, will want to protect their information as much as possible. We will try to move them along, if we can, but that is a really interesting dialogue with industry when the information that will be released is, in their mind, proprietary.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

This is for the JAG.

What protocols do you have in place to ensure that when a sexual assault case goes from the military to the civilian courts, all the evidence is transferred?