Information & Ethics Committee on Oct. 18th, 2006

[Dale Eisler]

No.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

“Since we have learned that staff in the Prime Minister's Office had committed serious breaches of the Privacy Act regarding access to information....” That is essentially the same statement.

All right, those are the kinds of allegations that were made about this. We have gone through this. I really don't know where to proceed with my questioning except to ask if there is any information you'd like to share that could substantiate these very serious allegations that political staff have been illegally in receipt of the names of ATIP requesters, now or in the past. That is the mandate of the study we're currently engaged in.

[Dale Eisler]

Based on my own experience and my own knowledge, absolutely not. We are not privy to the names of requesters, as I have said and Mr. Jack has said. We aren't now and we never have been, and we have never, therefore, passed this sort of information along. Nor have we ever, in my experience with either this government or the previous government, been asked for that kind of information.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Leadbeater of the ATIP commissioner's office has told us that the practice of political staff receiving the names of ATIP requesters is widespread and common. In fact, he said in the September 20 article that led to all of this:

We see situations where representatives from the minister's office will meet on a regular basis, sometimes weekly, with the access to information people to find out what access requests have been received and what material is being released, and in the course of those meetings there is a tendency to share with the minister's staff the identities of the requesters.

Do you have any knowledge about this allegedly common practice?

[Dale Eisler]

I have no knowledge of that. In my experience, that never occurs. People respect the confidentiality of the Privacy Act as it applies to ATI files, and that information is not requested, sought. Simply, we are not privy to it.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

A hypothetical question: What would you do, either of you, if a member of the political staff of the Prime Minister's Office were to call you up and say, “We're a little concerned about a journalist who's been making these ATIP requests, could you please tip us off if he makes a request on such-and-such an issue”? What would your professional obligation be in response?

[Dale Eisler]

It would be to say no, and first of all, I wouldn't know if a journalist had made a request. I'm not privy to that information. We're not privy to that information. That is something the ATI people would deal with, the people who take in the requests and process the requests. There is no need for us to know.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Kenney and Mr. Eisler, thank you.

That concludes the first round. We now have the second round, which is five minutes per caucus.

Mr. Peterson.

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Just following up on what Mr. Kenney was talking about, disregarding PCO, Mr. Leadbeater said it was okay for the minister and/or the staff in a minister's office to know the identity of a requester and the contents of that request. Does that concur with what all of you consider to be the law?

[Dale Eisler]

I am....

Sorry, Denis.

[Denis Kratchanov]

Perhaps I can jump in here.

A minister is the head of the institution under the act, and decisions about access are made in his name and under his delegated authority. So if he wants information about a particular access request and how it's been handled, yes, he is entitled to know. The practice I'm aware of is that ministers don't seek that information and neither do their staff. ATIP officers are very well aware that the names of ATIP requesters should not be distributed widely. They should be kept within the ATIP office for the most part. There might be exceptions, but it is not a practice to share it widely.

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

But under the law, the minister and/or staff are entitled to know the contents of the request and the identity of the requester.

[Denis Kratchanov]

Yes, a minister, if he or she wants to know that.

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

I agree with you.

Professor Roberts is saying that should not be the case. The minister should not know the identity of the requester and/or the category of the requester, and the department should probably not know it either. The department will slow down the request and the whole system will bog down even when the category of the requester is made known. Is that correct?

[Prof. Alasdair Roberts]

I should clarify that I didn't make any statement as to whether the minister should be entitled to know the name of the requester.

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

No, no.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Let him finish, Mr. Peterson.

[Prof. Alasdair Roberts]

But it is unambiguous that it is standard practice to disseminate the occupation of the requester.

The underlying issue is the bureaucratic procedure that has built up over years and continues to exist, which threatens the right to equal treatment and also creates the opportunity for the right of privacy to be violated.

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Do you feel, Professor Roberts, that the name of the requester should not be made known to the minister and/or staff?

[Prof. Alasdair Roberts]

I don't have any particular answer to that question at the moment. I would be a little leery about beginning to tell ministerial staff the name of a requester.

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

I'll go back to our questions on Monday. My concern is that there's a lack of timely disclosure or a lack of timely information. I think the public has a right to know.

I would like to find ways, maybe following some of your suggestions, Professor Roberts, in which we could have more timely disclosure. I think your suggestions are ones we should take into consideration.

If Mr. Eisler, Mr. Jack, or Mr. Kratchanov have any suggestions as to how we could speed up the process and get the requests out within 30 days, I would welcome that.

I was a little shocked when I heard that some of the requests were 48 days overdue. On Monday we heard how some were five months overdue in terms of responses.

Do you have any suggestions, Mr. Eisler, on how we could speed this up? Mr. Roberts says it gets bogged down in the bureaucracy at so many levels.

[Dale Eisler]

Well, I'm not an expert on the ATI system. I haven't studied it, as Professor Roberts has, so I'm reluctant to offer too many suggestions. I would say the number of ATI requests that the government receives is always increasing and it's a huge operational burden.

From my experience, I think people put their best efforts into this and are simply trying to manage the system as best they can. I know we're working at PCO to always do better on our ATI.

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Do you need more staff at PCO?

[Dale Eisler]

I don't think it's my place to determine that. But I know that from my experience, people put their best efforts into this, recognize the importance of it, and respect the act.

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

But it can take a lot of time when you have 25—