Information & Ethics Committee on Nov. 24th, 2009

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you for being here this morning, Mr. Bruce and Mr. Rimmer.

In the news lately, I think we've all been watching with great interest the hearings into what's happening in Afghanistan, the whole issue of prisoner transfers, issues of torture. In those hearings before another standing committee, a senior public servant has indicated that he received advice to stop documenting his reports by e-mail and to start doing that verbally. Would you see that as a violation of the directive on recordkeeping, if that kind of advice was offered within a department to stop sending written messages or providing written documentation and, instead, moving to verbal recommendations or documentation?

[Peter Bruce]

One of the important provisions of the directive is that the IM senior official identify information resources of business value based on analysis of departmental functions and activities carried out by the department and to enable it to support its legislated mandate, the protection of information resources of business value. So within the context of the operation of any department, they have to make those decisions and apply this policy. So it would be the senior IM official in the department who would be responsible for making that call.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

That doesn't answer the question.

Is it in compliance? It's important.

[Peter Bruce]

We've seen what's in the newspapers and we've read some of the testimony. I think we don't have enough information to answer that question, I'm sorry.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, could I ask in what capacity you are intervening in Mr. Siksay's questioning? I just don't understand the procedure. Maybe you could help me on it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

I simply wanted to have an answer to the question that the member asked.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

Would that not be Mr. Siksay's prerogative? Did he share his time?

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Okay, we're not going to carry on.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

I'm only trying to understand your procedure.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

I understand. I wanted to hear the answer as well.

Mr. Siksay, please.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Thank you, Chairman, and thank you for your intervention. It was helpful.

To your knowledge, has Treasury Board or the librarian and archivist launched an investigation, given the allegations that we've heard at another standing committee that there may have been this kind of interference in the documentation of work undertaken on behalf of the Government of Canada?

[Peter Bruce]

Not to my knowledge.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

If I understand your answer correctly, Mr. Bruce, it would be the particular manager at Foreign Affairs or Defence who would be responsible for following up on those kinds of allegations, or those kinds of charges.

[Peter Bruce]

It would be in the first instance, certainly.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

At any stage, would Treasury Board become involved in seeking an answer or in holding somebody accountable in the system for the kind of breach that had happened?

[Peter Bruce]

There are provisions for that and consequences. Certainly section 7.2 has consequences and allows the Treasury Board to intervene and take measures according to the context and what has happened that might be in violation of the directive or policies.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Does the librarian and archivist have any role in pursuing those kinds of issues, Mr. Rimmer?

[Douglas Rimmer]

Our role would be primarily in those situations in which documents might be at risk of being destroyed, as I mentioned in response to an earlier question.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

To your knowledge, the librarian and archivist is not doing any kind of investigation of the situation with regard to the allegations made about what was happening in Afghanistan.

[Douglas Rimmer]

There are allegations that have been made before another committee. I understand that the process is still in place. It is still ongoing.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

When I look at the directive, and when I hear you speak this morning, I hear about business value. The word “business” crops up a lot. Transparency, accountability, and historical documentation don't seem to crop up as much in the directive.

I wonder if you can explain to me a little bit more--I think you addressed it a little bit in your opening statement, Mr. Rimmer--about the question of business value and the management of records as a business asset. Why is there emphasis on business value or information as a business asset in this document as opposed to transparency, providing information, historical documentation, and that kind of thing?

[Douglas Rimmer]

I think the notion of business value is tied to the idea that the records that need to be kept need to relate to those functions the department carries out. So the analytical framework is linked very much to what work the particular entity is doing.

I mentioned that this concept of information resources of business value is linked to an international standard. There's an ISO standard. I think it's 15489, but I might have my number just a little bit wrong. It speaks to this issue, and our work is consistent with that framework. Certainly, within the business of government institutions, the notion of accountability, transparency, and keeping records that support decision-making are part of the business of government institutions. That's reflected in the directive on recordkeeping, which establishes the objectives and the expected results and deals explicitly with transparency and accountability. So the goal of effective recordkeeping is to create transparency and accountability.

We're speaking of records as they're managed within departments for departmental purposes. At some point in time, Library and Archives Canada gets interested in those documents for their historical purpose, and those that are assessed by our professionals as being the appropriate records to be preserved for all time are transferred to us. That's only a small segment of the total number of records the government creates. They are different from those records that might have business value for departments. They might have business value for five years; they might have business value for 50 years.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Given the emphasis on business value, why, then, are so many crown corporations and other agencies not mandated directly by this directive?

[Peter Bruce]

The authorities under the Financial Administration Act give us the authority to put directives in place that apply to these institutions. Whereas the Library and Archives of Canada Act and the Access to Information Act apply to 250 institutions, our authorities under the Financial Administration Act restrict us to 112. You'll notice that it does encourage all separate agencies to adopt these practices, and we expect that there will be actually broad adoption.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Could I ask one question about that? When you're talking about encouraging these organizations, is there any process in place that would set up agreements between Treasury Board and those agencies to actually have them have a more specific mandate around this directive or adopt it ?