Thank you, sir.
The question was, can the scheme of the Canada Evidence Act be used to cover up information that's embarrassing to the government? This has been addressed by the Federal Court in various decisions. Mr. Justice Noël clearly stated that the court will not prohibit disclosure where the government's sole or primordial purpose for seeking the prohibition is to shield itself from criticism or embarrassment.
The court also quoted with approval the following statement:
...a restriction sought to be justified on the ground of national security is not legitimate if its genuine purpose or demonstrable effect is to protect interests unrelated to national security, including, for example, to protect a government from embarrassment or exposure of wrongdoing....
In another case, Mr. Justice Mosley agreed with Mr. Justice Noël that information that is embarrassing to the government cannot be protected, but he added:
Regrettably, in some cases protecting Canada's security and international relations interests may have the unintended and unwanted effect of protecting a government from embarrassment or exposure. However, if based on the court's examination of the evidence that is the sole or genuine reason the Attorney General seeks to withhold the information, the information must be disclosed.