Information & Ethics Committee on Nov. 30th, 2010

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

I have a question around the actual accountability and enforcement of this. I think the chair has raised.... I've been here long enough to know that quite often the researcher whispers in the ear of a chair of a committee, saying that's what we said last year. In some ways, this is what was said five years ago. The numbers you presented in your speech today are indeed improved or look optimistic.

What is the ministerial accountability for ongoing F ratings? What are the consequences within a department for a deputy minister, or an associate deputy minister, or the director general of the corporate secretariat, or the director of the access to information and privacy protection division? What happens if you keep getting Fs?

[Gérald Cossette]

It's my responsibility to make sure the performance of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade improves. This is what I'm asked to do by my deputy minister, and I will be judged on the outcome of the work.

It's the same thing with regard to Madame Dubé, the director general of corporate services, and the same thing with Madam McCulloch, who is the director of ATIP.

What we've done this year that we did not do in previous years is we've asked people to report on a monthly basis as to where they are in the processing of their files. So we have the capacity on a monthly basis, the way we do with other responsibilities managers may have, to ask them where they are with regard to delivering on time, whether it's 80%, 90%, 100%. So we now have the capacity to track whether or not people are delivering on that commitment. Moreover, we have included in their performance agreement the obligation to deliver within the timeframe provided to us by the law, bearing in mind, of course, that they have capacity or don't have capacity to do it.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

I come from health care, and we have wait times all the time. All the experts in wait time say “drain the pool”. What we were hearing before is that carrying over backlogs from year to year doesn't work. So are people working overtime? Does everybody just go home at five o'clock every day with huge backlogs, year to year? How do you fix this?

You keep talking about capacity, but I'm not really sure of the consequences to a deputy minister who keeps getting an F. Where does the ministerial accountability fit in, where the minister says this just isn't good enough? I'm still not seeing the consequences.

[Gérald Cossette]

Well, the minister's accountability is to government and to Parliament, so that's an issue for Parliament to discuss with the government.

With regard to our own accountability, we're being asked to deliver a certain number of things within the legislative framework provided to us, and that's what we're trying to do, given the availability of the resources to do so.

Now that we have the financial resources and the capability to deliver within the proper timeframe, it is my responsibility and within my accountability to make sure that in 18 months, if I show up at this committee, I don't repeat the same story we've heard in the past. That being said, given the current backlog, and given the fact that the commissioner will report on the current fiscal year, we expect to have a bad score next year as well, because we need to get rid of it. Then we'll be in a position, basically, to meet the proper deadlines. So there is an expectation, on my part, that I'll see another F for this year, as we get rid of the backlog. Next year should be much better. But there is a lag time here that has to be taken into account. We have to build the capacity. We have to get rid of the backlog. Then the new score will come in.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Very quickly, I'm really concerned about WikiLeaks. There are several problems with it, but I am concerned from the point of view that senior people, and indeed ministers, may be fearful of being frank in talking to their counterparts.

As it relates to you, do you not expect that there will be a real avalanche of requests? Harold talked about a 78% increase. That's astronomical. Given what's out there in the media now, and with hundreds of thousands of other documents to come out, in which you're likely named, what's your judgment? This is going to really impact Foreign Affairs, I think.

[Gérald Cossette]

We're expecting WikiLeaks to release some 270,000 documents. A limited number of these documents--a bit more than 2,000--relate specifically to Canada-U.S. relations. There may be mention of Canada in hundreds of thousands of documents. Will those references be relevant to Canada's foreign relations, or are we just being mentioned in passing--Canada was at the table? Or will they be specifically about what some of our heads of mission may have said or about some of the discussions we may have had with foreign countries? That remains to be seen.

Depending on the issues, there may be a very significant interest in questioning the government about some current and past policies. Or there may not be. I'm in no position to tell you if it will represent hundreds of thousands of pages of requests or no requests at all. My assumption is that there will be a demand for this, given the size of the leak.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Mr. Easter.

We'll go to Ms. Block for five minutes.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I would like to join my colleagues in welcoming you here today. I appreciated hearing your opening remarks.

I want to go back to the Information Commissioner's “2008–2009 report card at a glance”. In the third bullet, she notes that “DFAIT received more consultation requests than access requests and started the year with a backlog of 459 cases”.

You noted in your opening remarks that “[a]s the Information Commissioner reported, DFAIT faces unique challenges associated with internal and external consultations related to our national security and international relations interests”.

Then you identified, for my colleague, that foreign government consultations are a particular factor in lengthening response times to requests at DFAIT.

To what extent does DFAIT use information-sharing agreements to clarify in advance what can or cannot be disclosed at the time the information is originally obtained?

[Gérald Cossette]

Information-sharing agreements are signed, most of the time, on very specific issues--the exchange of intelligence, for instance--as they relate to specific circumstances.

If we're talking about the general conversation diplomats may have, there is no specific arrangement we have with foreign countries about these things. This is diplomacy on a daily basis. That being said, as I was saying before, there is an expectation of confidence. We are being told things, because they know that this discussion will not become public.

As the requests come in, and we're asked to release that information, there is a requirement, a polite requirement, to ask the foreign government if they would be in agreement with releasing the information. Some of the information may be substantive enough that it should be protected. On some other issues they may be willing to release it publicly, the same way they would in their own country.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Thank you.

In my second question I want to pick up on my colleague's observation regarding the 78% increase. You stated in your remarks that over a four-year span, from 2004-05 to 2008-09, there was a steady annual increase of requests for access and consultations under both the ATIA and PA, for a total increase of 78%.

Why were there so many increases over those years? What reasons can you give us for that huge increase over that period of time?

[Gérald Cossette]

Unfortunately, the only thing I can do is to observe the increase. In terms of why there was an increase, there may be multiple reasons why Canadians decided to proceed through that route instead of any other means available to them.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Okay.

I want to follow up with another comment you made. You said:

Despite this, the Information Commissioner acknowledged that DFAIT was able to process almost 1,000 more ATIP requests in 2008-09 than the year before as well as make a number of process improvements.

My understanding is that happened before you were able to employ the additional 12 officers. How did you manage to do that?

[Gérald Cossette]

I would have to ask the ladies at this table who were in charge of that operation.

[Monique McCulloch]

We did have additional operational funds in that fiscal year to have ATIP consultants on hand to help us. In 2007-08, there were 12 positions. This has been a gradual increase in capacity over the years.

In 2007-08, there was an increase of 12 permanent resources as well, which were unfortunately cash managed due to the financial situation of the department. They were cash managed in 2007-08 and 2008-09, and they were actually made part of the permanent reference level in early 2009-10. That is to say that in 2008-09 there was additional capacity, both permanent and consultants, put forward to try to address it.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Okay. Thank you.

Do I have time remaining?

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

About 19 seconds.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Okay, thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Madame Thi Lac, cinq minutes.

[Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I asked you some questions earlier and we talked about the fact that 5% of all requests are not being processed on time. Do certain types of requests fall into that category? Or does that apply to all requests in general? Are the same types of requests, perhaps especially complex ones, often the ones that are not processed on time?

[Gérald Cossette]

We would have to look more closely at the requests that make up this 5%. We do know, however, that in the case of requests involving several departments, consultations with foreign governments and national security matters, the Justice Department must determine what information can or cannot be disclosed and such request therefore take much longer and are more complex to process.

[Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

What is the procedure that you follow once you have received an access to information request? Once it comes in, how is the request processed and who has authority? You said that experts often step in.

What if I sent you an access to information request and you had to explain to me why it takes 30 days to process it?

How do you normally process a request? I'm not talking about exceptional cases. What does a public servant do from the time the request is received up to the moment an answer is given?

[Monique McCulloch]

The truth of the matter is that 30 calendar days gives us 20 or 21 working days. We lose several days.

Within the first 24 to 48 hours, the request is examined to ensure that our department is in fact the one that should be responding. Then, the programs within the department that would have the type of documents requested are identified. Acknowledgments of receipt are sent out within the first 24 to 48 hours. The new request is then assigned to an analyst.

Also during the first 48 hours, the request is examined to see if any clarification is needed or if the nature of the request itself is too broad. For instance, if someone is requesting that all information concerning Afghanistan in 2007 be turned over, then we have a major problem on our hands. Of course, we try and contact the person making the request quickly to ask for some clarification as to the scope of the request.

We send an ATIP tasking to programs that have relevant information and give them five working days to respond.

Fairly in-depth research sometimes needs to be done. People will do everything they possibly can to find all of the information related to the request, such as paper copies of documents or, as Mr. Cossette mentioned, electronic versions stored on different networks. Some information might be available abroad. The process involves a considerable amount of research.

During this five-day period, pertinent information is not only gathered, it is also reviewed and analysed. Those doing the work are asked to tell us in their own words why turning over certain documents could compromise our international relations.

[Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Who makes the decision to reject an access to information request?

[Monique McCulloch]

After we receive the program recommendations, we conduct an analysis to ensure that complying with the requirements of the legislation is justified.

In other words, the expert provides an explanation as to how this would affect our international relations, for example, and my analysts must be confident that the request falls into the category of the exemptions set out in the Access to Information Act.

[Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Who has the authority to either reject or approve this request?