Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.
Information & Ethics committee That could probably work.
November 1st, 2017Committee meeting
Suzanne Legault
Information & Ethics committee The reason I'm really not a proponent of having an ability to decline to process a request if the information is already available is based on experience at our office. There is a similar provision now. It's in section 68.1. Basically, if something is already published or is about to be published, the government can decline to process the request.
November 1st, 2017Committee meeting
Suzanne Legault
Information & Ethics committee There is already a provision in the act for institutions to get an extension when there are a large number of records and providing the disclosure would unreasonably interfere with the operation of the institution. That already exists in the current legislation.
November 1st, 2017Committee meeting
Suzanne Legault
Information & Ethics committee It's an extension rather than a refusal. You've heard testimony that some of these requests are bogging down the system, putting gum in the system—30 million pages. You have to look at the facts. We're doing evidence-based policy here. If you look at last year, the average number of pages processed per request across the system, for all institutions, was about 200 pages.
November 1st, 2017Committee meeting
Suzanne Legault
Information & Ethics committee That would fix it, yes.
November 1st, 2017Committee meeting
Suzanne Legault
Information & Ethics committee The reason I'm recommending that there be a formal provision for mediation is that sometimes some complainants do not wish to participate in the mediation process. I think the mediation process is extremely helpful in resolving complaints in a more timely way. I think that would be helpful.
November 1st, 2017Committee meeting
Suzanne Legault
Information & Ethics committee I absolutely agree with the submission of Mr. Di Gangi and all of the supporters of that submission.
November 1st, 2017Committee meeting
Suzanne Legault
Information & Ethics committee There are already a few examples provided in the special report. One only has to glean through the published access to information requests that exist, which are publicly available. Any request that does not provide subject matter, type of record, and timeline would be denied under the Access to Information Act under the new provision in Bill C-58.
November 1st, 2017Committee meeting
Suzanne Legault
Information & Ethics committee In any event, regardless of whether it is provided in good faith by some government institutions, in some instances what one really has to worry about is when it is not provided because the new provisions are being applied. As a regulator, I cannot recommend or order an institution to process an access request if the law allows them to deny that request.
November 1st, 2017Committee meeting
Suzanne Legault
Information & Ethics committee I cannot make up the law.
November 1st, 2017Committee meeting
Suzanne Legault
Information & Ethics committee I've read Peter's submission.
November 1st, 2017Committee meeting
Suzanne Legault
Information & Ethics committee As I said in my special report, I strongly recommend that these provisions be removed from section 6 of the act as provided in Bill C-58.
November 1st, 2017Committee meeting
Suzanne Legault
Information & Ethics committee If the law as provided in Bill C-58 allows government institutions to refuse to process a request because it doesn't contain all of those requirements—not just one of them, all of them: subject matter, type of record, and timeline—then they have the legal ability to deny the request, and I can't do anything about it.
November 1st, 2017Committee meeting
Suzanne Legault
November 1st, 2017Committee meeting
Suzanne Legault
November 1st, 2017Committee meeting
Suzanne Legault