From a technical perspective, the distinctions between the Information Commissioner's position and what's in the Federal Accountability Act is that the Federal Accountability Act builds in specific forms of exemptions or exclusions to protect information related either to the core operations of commercial crown corporations or the sensitive information gathered during an investigation, examination, or audit being carried out by agents of Parliament.
The Information Commissioner took a different approach in terms of those exemptions and exclusions. Some he would eliminate altogether, in particular around crown corporations; others he would limit to a narrow cast of information, such as for agents of Parliament. The Information Commissioner proposed that it would only be the information they obtained from a government institution, whereas Bill C-2 proposes it would be information obtained and created by the agents of Parliament in the course of their investigation, examination, or audit.
In addition, Bill C-2 proposes a specific exemption for internal audit working papers and draft reports, which the Information Commissioner does not support. If you look specifically at the internal audit exemption, again the idea behind it is to ensure that there is sufficient protection in place to give an appropriate level of comfort to public officials, so they are free to voice opinions and have discussions with internal auditors without the draft of those discussions being publicly available before the final report. That's the last point I will make: the final report is always going to be publicly available.