Information & Ethics Committee on June 1st, 2010

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

That's fine. We know.... He has admitted before this committee that his unrelease memo--“unrelease that”.... I believe he called it “stupid”, but it's clearly a violation of the act.

In any event, the key point here is that the department was willing to release 139 pages and they felt that was appropriate information to be released--and it in fact would have gone out if the mail had gone--and Mr. Togneri stepped in as exempt staff, for whatever reason.... We do know that this is a highly secretive government that seems to be involved consistently in delay and coverup, etc. That's becoming well known.

But in terms of the access to information being reduced from 139 to 30 pages, who made that decision? And was there any exempt staff, anybody from the PMO or the minister, involved in that tremendous reduction in information that was released? Do you know?

[Tom Makichuk]

I am not aware of any representative of the Prime Minister's Office or any other political exempt staff, with the exception of Mr. Togneri, being involved with this.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

We understand that, and of course we're trying to get.... Mr. Togneri, when he was before this committee, stated that he passed on the information. We asked him what happened with the information--how did it get reduced? He passed on that information to a Jillian Andrews, who we've asked to come before this committee. The clerk has issued a summons. You haven't mentioned her as yet.

By whom or where was the release of information changed to reduce the amount of 139 pages to 30? Do you know ? If it was within your department, somebody had to make a decision somewhere to take out 109 pages of information that at one point in time were going to be released.

[Tom Makichuk]

As I've already answered to a previous question, this was an extraordinary circumstance, and it was escalated up from my level to my director general, then from my director general to my assistant deputy minister, where, I understand, the decision was rendered.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

But we're missing 109 pages here. Do you know who made the decision on them, and where did they go? If you don't, that's fine, but somebody sure as the devil made the decision somewhere.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Okay. Sorry, Mr. Easter, sir. We're past your time.

A quick response if you care to, Mr. Makichuk.

[Tom Makichuk]

Mr. Chair, as I said, I understand that the decision was rendered at the assistant deputy minister level. The legal authority to make the disclosure was done by a member of my staff. I should also further underline that we later received a complete request specifying the report by name and the report was disclosed in full and on time in response to that request.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Thank you.

Mr. Rickford, please.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Just before I start officially, you don't have any follow-up questions for your colleague...?

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Mr. Rickford, it's your time.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Okay. Good.

Thank you to the witnesses for appearing today.

My questions are going to be focused to you, Mrs. Wesch, and I want to say from the outset that I appreciate you guys coming here today and giving answers to our questions.

We are hearing from more and more witnesses, including today's panel, and I want to commend the work of the departments in their adherence to rules and policies respecting the access to information and privacy. The allegations that the opposition members--particularly the Liberals--are advancing appear more and more baseless as time wears on and are probably more a function of another failed anecdote for blowing $39 million worth of taxpayers' money in the Liberal ad scam.

That said, there are two really important consequences. First of all, by my assessment, they're smearing the good work of the relevant departments and the transparency of this government. Secondly, which is more and more clear, we're getting in the way of important and substantive work on privacy matters that this committee has set down to work on.

Mrs. Wesch, you mentioned in the outset of your comments that you have never been asked to delay, alter, or deny a request. Is that what I heard you say?

[Ann Wesch]

That is what I said, and it is true.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

I want to build on a few good questions from my colleague Mr. Siksay. You mentioned you had weekly meetings with the Prime Minister's Office. I'd like to know a little bit more about this. You said that these are informational meetings.

[Ann Wesch]

That's correct.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

How long are these meetings?

[Ann Wesch]

They last 10 or 15 minutes. I go to the issues management office. We usually discuss the requests. We print them from our database, the requests and consultations that have come into PCO during the last week. I also provide a list of requests that were closed and have gone out. The issues management group would already have received these requests prior to the release, so they would have seen the records.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

You mentioned in your response to Mr. Siksay that you don't categorize, label, or get feedback from the PMO on these issues. It's simply an informational session.

[Ann Wesch]

That's right. We don't categorize our requests or do any special handling. We provide them with information on all requests. Before documents are released to the applicant, we always give them a release package.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Do you play any sort of advisory role, other than just providing information?

[Ann Wesch]

We provide information.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Could you give me an example? Is that appropriate?

[Ann Wesch]

I'm not sure....

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

When you give a piece of information and it's not categorized, not labelled, how would it come across?

[Ann Wesch]

Before the request goes out, we send over what we're going to send to the applicant. We include a copy of the memorandum that went to the chief of staff, describing the request. So the records are there, just as the applicant will get them.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

I don't have any more questions. I will share my time with Ms. McLeod.