Evidence of meeting #36 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was files.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Suzanne Legault  Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
Layla Michaud  Acting Assistant Commissioner, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada

12:05 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Blaine Calkins

Okay. We can do that, certainly. I'll ask the clerk to call the roll.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 3)

That motion is carried.

Mr. Blaikie.

12:05 p.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Is there then an opportunity to speak to the motion before we have a ruling on its admissibility? I think what's important here is that we do have opportunities in good faith to change the wording of the motion. It's important, I would think, for all members of this committee that we have the opportunity to hear about how some of these events have been organized, so that the government has an opportunity to explain how they've been organizing these activities and whether they're appropriate. I don't see a reason why any members of the committee wouldn't want to have a discussion about this. It's an important issue in the Canadian public eye at the present time.

I think those who are involved in organizing these events have a lot to tell Canadians about whether they're appropriate. If it's a matter of simply making other changes to this motion in order to hear that conversation and give the government the opportunity to explain whether they're doing anything untoward to Canadians, then we should avail ourselves of that opportunity. We've had up to 80 of these events that have been organized, so there's a number of them. It's been a issue in the House. It's been an issue in the media. We've been getting the same answer from the government. I think it would be good to hear from someone from the Liberal Party who might be able to add new information.

12:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Blaine Calkins

Mr. Blaikie, the debate on this has been adjourned. Your motion and the amendment to it have not been defeated. We have not actually had the question on this. We will have opportunities to discuss this, but because the motion that was moved by Mr. Lightbound, and accepted and adopted by the majority of the members on this committee, has adjourned the debate on this particular issue, I'm now obligated, as the chair, to move on with the agenda that we have today.

12:10 p.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Did it not close debate on the amendment and not the motion? I'm just seeking clarity.

12:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Blaine Calkins

That's an interesting question.

On the advice of the clerk, the debate is adjourned on the amendment. It's considered part of the original motion, so it's adjourned for this particular....

Colleagues, we have the Information Commissioner here. If we're going to—

Very quickly, sir.

12:10 p.m.

Conservative

Matt Jeneroux Conservative Edmonton Riverbend, AB

I want to echo my colleague's thoughts here. We've seen a lot of these in the media, and it's an incredible opportunity that I think the government side has right now to be able to bring this forward and discuss it here at committee. We're seeing minister after minister go through these fundraisers, these pay-for-access schemes, and they have a chance here to bring and talk about—

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Joël Lightbound Liberal Louis-Hébert, QC

On a point of order—

12:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Blaine Calkins

Mr. Lightbound.

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Joël Lightbound Liberal Louis-Hébert, QC

—we have 45 minutes left, we have the Information Commissioner here, and we've passed the dilatory motion, which means we should move on at this point.

12:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Blaine Calkins

You are correct, Mr. Lightbound.

Madam Legault, we have to move on with our discussion today. We have 45 minutes left. We appreciate your being here today to discuss the supplementary estimates (B), and we welcome your opening remarks on that. I'm not going to get into the details of it, because we have a short amount of time.

Madam Legault, the floor is yours.

12:10 p.m.

Suzanne Legault Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My remarks are very brief. In fact, my colleague is handing out a deck that I'll be referring to as my opening remarks.

Good afternoon everyone.

Thank you for asking me to appear today. I'm here with Layla Michaud, my acting assistant commissioner and chief financial officer.

Mr. Chair, I'm here to ask you to approve a request for additional funding, which was included in supplementary estimates (B) tabled on November 3.

To assist the committee in makings its decision this afternoon, I've prepared a series of slides on the Office of the Information Commissioner’s complaint inventory reduction strategy. These slides explain the objective of the strategy, the purpose of requesting additional funding, how this strategy will be implemented, and the intended results.

If you would be so kind as to turn to the first slide in the short deck that I've provided you, essentially you'll see that the request for additional funding was made to the Treasury Board, and the purpose is strictly to reduce the inventory of complaints at the OIC. The Treasury Board supported the request for additional funds for one year. The funding that is being requested is for fiscal year 2016-17, and it is really a fit-gap measure that was put in place pending the possible introduction and passage of amendments to the Access to Information Act.

The funding that has been awarded, or that is subject to approval today, is strictly to be allocated to investigations. The objective is very specific: we have been required to complete 2,361 complaints. This is a very precise number, and the number is really based on our historical performance in terms of how many complaints we handle per individual, per investigator, and so on. That's why the number is very specific.

We started the inventory with 3,000 complaints, just slightly over that. We are expecting to receive close to 2,000 new complaints this year, based on our current projections, and we have three-quarters of the year done. With the augmented investigative capacity with the additional funding, we would close over 2,000 files, and that would leave a remainder of about 2,600, so that's essentially a reduction of about 500 complaints. If the funding is not approved, then the inventory will increase to over 3,600 complaints.

What we have done so far, Mr. Chair, is cash-manage, essentially, pending the decision of this committee. We have hired a mix of full-time employees and consultants, and we have provided comprehensive training to these FTEs. We have managed to secure some additional space for these additional people with the goodwill of Elections Canada, which is housed in the same office as we are. That's also a temporary measure, but we're not paying for this office space at this time, thanks to Elections Canada. Part of the funding was to upgrade the IT network to service the additional people.

As for what we are doing in terms of monitoring the results, we have very fixed closure targets every month, which we follow. I meet with my senior team basically every week. We also review the results on a monthly basis at the executive committee, which is composed mostly of our directors of investigations. We also submit the results of our progress to our audit and evaluation committee. By the way, a representative of the Auditor General also sits on our audit committee on a regular basis, so they're also apprised of this. That's relevant because, should the funding be approved, the Auditor General will also review how the money has been spent and allocated.

If you look to the last slide with a graphic, I included the graph because, as you can see, in red, it basically shows the performance we've managed to achieve so far in anticipation of this funding's being rolled out for the entire fiscal year. You can see the difference that a few additional people have made in our closure rate.

The next steps, really, are the approval or not by this committee of the supplementary (B)s. We will be reporting on the results of this initiative to this committee and to Parliament via our annual report or, obviously, at any time that this committee would like us to report.

Thank you again, Mr. Chair, for the opportunity to explain what is happening in terms of the funding requested in the supplementary estimates (B), which must be voted on.

We're ready to answer your questions.

12:15 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Blaine Calkins

Thank you, Madam Commissioner.

Monsieur Massé, vous disposez de sept minutes.

12:15 p.m.

Liberal

Rémi Massé Liberal Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Legault, thank you for participating again in the work of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics. It's very much appreciated.

I'll start by asking you a more general series of questions.

Obviously, it's my first opportunity to look at these numbers. I understand that, in the supplementary estimates (B), you want an additional $3.3 million, which represents an increase of about 30% of your current budget.

Can you provide more details on staff distribution? How many additional human resources do you plan to hire? Have you already hired additional staff? If so, are they casual employees or consultants?

12:15 p.m.

Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada

Suzanne Legault

I can certainly provide more details.

It was a bit complicated because the budget hadn't been approved yet. It's almost December and the situation is somewhat complex.

When determining the amount needed during the year, we calculated the cost of hiring 20 investigator employees. These employees would be permanent, temporary or contract. Eight consultants were also included in the plan. Amounts were allocated to supplementary legal aid services for investigations. An amount was also allocated to the computer network. As a result of the extra staff, we had to increase our network's computing capacity. Lastly, the $220,000 represents the additional benefits. This money doesn't come back to us.

To date, I think we've hired 16 people, including permanent, term and contract employees. Moreover, 17 consultants were incorporated into the Office of the Commissioner. We remained within the available budget. However, since we couldn't hire as many permanent employees as we had wanted as a result of the annual funding, we managed the situation this way.

Not all the employees started working at the same time. They needed training so that they could conduct investigations. We have a case management computer system. Everything is computerized, and the employees need training. That's why we brought them in gradually, in groups. We just hired one final group last week. We currently have stable staff. If the requested budget isn't approved today, we'll need to start reducing our staff.

12:20 p.m.

Liberal

Rémi Massé Liberal Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC

I gather that you've already started building your capacity to meet your objectives. In terms of professional services, an additional $1.8 million has been requested to pay the consultants you mentioned. I assume those are the 17 investigators hired through a contract service.

12:20 p.m.

Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada

Suzanne Legault

Exactly.

Since it's a temporary measure, we can't hire permanent employees. We can't hire them on a long-term basis.

As a result, the request was submitted to the Treasury Board. The goal was to find a way to quickly absorb the increase in staff and to prevent the increase from having an impact over the long term.

12:20 p.m.

Liberal

Rémi Massé Liberal Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC

Will this desired funding increase be permanent once approved? If not, will it be part of a supplementary budget covering a specific year and period?

12:20 p.m.

Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada

Suzanne Legault

This funding request applies only to 2016-17.

12:20 p.m.

Liberal

Rémi Massé Liberal Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC

Okay.

12:20 p.m.

Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada

Suzanne Legault

Currently, the obvious difficulty is the government's announcement of proposed amendments to the Access to Information Act. Since we don't yet know the nature of the amendments, we can't predict their impact on the Office of the Commissioner's budget. In the meantime, the goal is to reduce the current inventory as much as possible, especially if the Office of the Commissioner must change the way it works. It's important to eliminate as much of the inventory of old files as possible to be able to deal with newer files.

12:20 p.m.

Liberal

Rémi Massé Liberal Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC

I'm quickly reading your proposal. Can you shed more light on your objectives for the inventory? Once the additional staff is in place, including the consultants and other employees, and with the help of the supplementary budget, what's your complaint inventory reduction goal for the end of the fiscal year? How many complaints will you have processed if everything is approved and if all the consultants are hired?

12:20 p.m.

Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada

Suzanne Legault

We started the year with slightly more than 3,000 files in the inventory. We're now down to about 2,800 files. This means that we have managed to absorb all the new files and that we have reduced the inventory by about 200 files. By the end of the year, we plan to have reduced the inventory by about 450 files and to have absorbed the files submitted in the meantime. As this time, we expect to receive 1,900 new complaints during the year. This means that we'll have 4,900 files to process and that 2,800 or 2,600 outstanding files would remain. That's our goal. To date, we're on target. We've made a great deal of progress, and we're truly delighted. We're starting to reduce the inventory, and we're succeeding for the first time in four years.

12:20 p.m.

Liberal

Rémi Massé Liberal Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC

Okay.

Is my time up, Mr. Chair?

12:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Blaine Calkins

No.

12:20 p.m.

Liberal

Rémi Massé Liberal Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC

If I only have a bit of time left, I'll stop here.