Evidence of meeting #19 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was commissioner.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:55 p.m.
Vice-Chair, National Privacy and Access Law Section, Canadian Bar Association
And originally in 1981 and 1986 we did call in our submissions for the extension of the Access to Information Act to crown corporations, subject to limited exceptions related to those crown corporations engaged in business and competitive activities.
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
What about subjecting the exclusion of cabinet confidences to review by the Information Commissioner?
4:55 p.m.
Vice-Chair, National Privacy and Access Law Section, Canadian Bar Association
We just did.
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
And obliging public officials to create the records necessary to document their actions and decisions?
4:55 p.m.
Vice-Chair, National Privacy and Access Law Section, Canadian Bar Association
I don't believe we have.
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
And what about providing a general public interest override for all exemptions, so that the public interest is put before the secrecy of the government?
4:55 p.m.
Vice-Chair, National Privacy and Access Law Section, Canadian Bar Association
I don't believe we have.
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Okay.
Next, what about ensuring that “all exemptions from the disclosure of government information are justified only on the basis of the harm or injury that would result from disclosure, not blanket exemption rules”?
May 6th, 2009 / 4:55 p.m.
Lawer, Legislation and Law Reform, Canadian Bar Association
Perhaps, if you could send us a list, I could do a search. It may be in a different context that we have addressed some of these issues.
5 p.m.
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Sure. I appreciate that.
There's just one more that I'll run by you, although I realize that this is a bit unfair to you.
Have you ensured “that the disclosure requirements of the Access to Information Act cannot be circumvented by secrecy provisions in other federal acts, while respecting the confidentiality of national security and the privacy of personal information”?
5 p.m.
Vice-Chair, National Privacy and Access Law Section, Canadian Bar Association
Not on that specific point, no.
5 p.m.
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Okay.
I just wanted to say that there was a much larger agenda around access to information that we're still hoping the government may indeed come through on at some point.
Thank you, Chair.
5 p.m.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to the witnesses. I've enjoyed listening to your testimony. It's such an important area.
I have three questions, if I may. First, what would you consider guiding principles in creating an access system? Accountability, transparency, and, I'm thinking, ethics and governance might be there. What would you consider the key building blocks in a cutting-edge or state-of-the-art access system? What pieces do we have, and where are we lacking?
That's all the first question. Then--
5 p.m.
Liberal
5 p.m.
Executive Member, National Privacy and Access Law Section, Canadian Bar Association
I think the principle of the legislation is already in the act. It just says that government information should be open, and individuals should have a right of access, and there should be independent review. Those are the standard principles. As well, if it's personal information, there should be protection of that. Those are the standard principles for a statute of this nature.
As to the key building blocks, I think we have to look at coverage. We know that coverage has been expanded, but it's the principles of who gets covered and why, which entities.
Then we have to look at what types of information should be available, and maybe they should be proactively available. With the current tools, it's a bit different than it was in 1982. The proactive disclosure is a great model, as I said before, so I think there is that. Then there should be exemptions that are limited and specific.
Those are the kinds of principles that inform most of this legislation.
5 p.m.
Executive Member, National Privacy and Access Law Section, Canadian Bar Association
I think it's an implication of the act, for sure.
5 p.m.
Executive Member, National Privacy and Access Law Section, Canadian Bar Association
If entities that are governed by this legislation know that there is this legislation, know that they have to be transparent, know that there are these principles of a quasi-constitutional nature, then they should be governing themselves in that manner. The senior levels of government and the senior levels of these agencies as well ought to have that as part of their mandate.
That is, I think, one of the governance principles implicit in this act.
5 p.m.
Vice-Chair, National Privacy and Access Law Section, Canadian Bar Association
Related to this is the way in which organizations within government have governance over their assets and then governance over their information.
A comprehensive system would include a way for government to manage their records on a day-to-day basis that is most efficient for the way that they have to operate but that is also mindful of the obligations of having those records available to individuals who want to have access to them.
I think that's an important piece of governance that would fit into that as well.
5 p.m.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Thank you.
Could you perhaps describe what the current culture is regarding access within the public service?
5 p.m.
Executive Member, National Privacy and Access Law Section, Canadian Bar Association
Well, now, that's a loaded question.
I think there probably have been improvements. I'm not intimately familiar with the culture of this government as compared to others. I think all--
