Evidence of meeting #15 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was backlog.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:50 p.m.
Deputy Information Commissioner, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
—in Gatineau Park, outside Montreal, and so forth. Those documents were disclosed under the Access to Information Act. That information, although it related to national security, could not meet an injury test for secrecy given its age and given the content in today's environment. However, it does relate to national security, and if this provision were in force today, that information would never be disclosed.
In fact, all of our national security apparatus would go beyond public scrutiny through transparency. If this were to pass, they would not have to meet injury tests, exercise discretion, or meet a public interest override. That is secrecy that has never existed in the 23 years that the act has been in force, and no one, to my knowledge, has ever asked for it.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this conversation on access to information, but I think it really should relate to the main estimates. I'm happy to have Mr. Leadbeater back to talk about this further, with further information for us in advance.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative David Tilson
It's Mr. Martin's time. He can do what he likes for seven minutes.
3:50 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Thank you.
As far as relevancy goes, I was ready for an argument, but I could argue this would be relevant because of the number of complaints that are going to be triggered.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
3:50 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Yes. I won't waste my time.
That's really interesting and very useful. On page 7, you talk about another pro-secrecy change that the Liberal--I should point out--Senate amendments are trying to add. The National Arts Centre would be shielded from access to information, as would, I should note, Sustainable Development Technology Canada. They're asking for absolute exemption for the National Arts Centre and SDTC. That's going to trigger complaints that are going to cost your budget money.
3:50 p.m.
Deputy Information Commissioner, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
Was there a question?
3:50 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Do you agree that the NAC is in no more need of this kind of absolute exemption than, for instance, the National Gallery of Canada, which operates fine under freedom of information, even though there's sensitivity about donors' identities?
3:50 p.m.
Deputy Information Commissioner, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
It's our opinion that the National Arts Centre does not need a specific exemption. The kinds of relations it has with its donors are important, and they are based on confidentiality. That confidentiality can be protected under the existing statute.
You mentioned the National Gallery. It operates in that milieu now and has no problem. Also, the Canadian Cultural Property Export Review Board--all of the discussions about the export of Canadian cultural property, and getting tax certificates for it, all being handled by an agency--is covered by the Access to Information Act and has no special exemption, and there were no complaints to our office over the years alleging that they could not do their job as a result.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
So why would Liberal senators be so adamant to put this blanket of secrecy over the National Arts Centre? Why are they so obsessed with the National Arts Centre?
3:55 p.m.
Deputy Information Commissioner, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
Is that a rhetorical question?
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for coming, and I'll try to stick to the budget.
I need some clarification. First of all, you went to the committee and asked for I think a 56% increase, correct? Is that an accurate statement--56%?
3:55 p.m.
Deputy Information Commissioner, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
I'm not sure exactly what percentage it was.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
3:55 p.m.
Deputy Information Commissioner, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
If you look at tab 4, the total is in the first column of the first page. Those are the heads, and for the second column, or 2006-07, the total is $2,814,000.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
You don't know what that is on a percentage basis? That was over the $5.5 million, or whatever it was. Is that correct?
3:55 p.m.
Deputy Information Commissioner, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
That's right. I can tell you it was 47%.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
Okay, that's what I was looking for. Thank you for that.
So this budget was approved, technically, approximately this time last year. You went through the process and got it approved. You've been spending money so far for the first seven months. At the six-month point, where are you on year to date?
3:55 p.m.
Deputy Information Commissioner, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
Where are we on year-to-date expenditures?
3:55 p.m.
Deputy Information Commissioner, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
I'm not sure. Do we have year-to-date expenditures? If we don't, I can get those for you.