Mr. Chairman, I think that Ms. Sabourin was referring to the performance score awarded to the department last year, which was indeed an F. There has been considerable improvement this year. In my annual report that was tabled this week, the department was awarded a D. Although it might not seem like much, the percentage of cases not handled within the stipulated timeframe has dropped from 60 per cent to 17.2 per cent.
The previous deputy minister, along with my predecessor, worked hard to structure the system and to try to improve the access to information services offered to Canadians by his department. I do not consider a D to be acceptable, but, in the report, my office recognizes the efforts that have been made to improve the situation.
With regard to Ms. Sabourin's attitude, it is not for me to comment on how a witness behaves when appearing before a parliamentary committee. It is, however, utterly unacceptable for Canadians not to receive statutory services. That being said, I do not think for a moment that deputy ministers get up in the morning thinking about how they can best contravene the Access to Information Act.
There is, however, a considerable lack of leadership. The amendments that Parliament made to subsection 4(2.1), if I'm not mistaken, which will not come into force until September, introduce the notion of an additional duty to provide all reasonable assistance to respond to the requests made by the public.
Parliament perhaps wanted to ratchet responsibility up a notch. With this amendment, not only does the coordination officer in the office serving the public have a responsibility, but the head of the agency also has a duty to assist. As soon as the amendment comes into force, my team and I will discuss how we can change our approach in order to evaluate this new responsibility in our reports to Parliament.