Evidence of meeting #75 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 c-58.

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
Nancy Bélanger  Deputy Commissioner, Legal Services and Public Affairs, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada

4:45 p.m.

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

Suzanne Legault

As I don't have the newspaper article you are referencing on hand, or the date, or the particular file, it is difficult for me to answer the question intelligently.

At first glance, nothing in Bill C-58 focuses on political interference.

We have conducted a few investigations in those circumstances. Since then, I have not heard of anything like that happening in government institutions.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Emmanuel Dubourg Liberal Bourassa, QC

I apologize, as I may have used the wrong term. I was talking about systemic interference rather than political interference.

You submitted a two-part special report entitled “Interference with Access to Information”. I am talking about systemic interference because I want to ask you whether any measures prevent people from submitting a significant number of unfounded requests in order to overload the system and make it operate poorly.

4:45 p.m.

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

Suzanne Legault

Unless I am mistaken, Mr. Dubourg, your question is about requests that are frivolous, vexatious or made in bad faith.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Emmanuel Dubourg Liberal Bourassa, QC

Yes, among others.

4:45 p.m.

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

Suzanne Legault

I have been the information commissioner for eight years and, to my knowledge, there have been very few such cases. That is really on the margin of the access to information system.

That said, I want to come back to what Mr. Baylis was trying to convince me of earlier. It is true that there are very rare cases where the access to information system may be abused. The only provision in Bill C-58 that addresses requests that are frivolous, vexatious or made in bad faith is proposed subclause 6.1(1)(d). In an early phase of amendments to the Access to Information Act, that provision is certainly appropriate under the circumstances, as it enables institutions and the information commissioner to deal with these issues.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Emmanuel Dubourg Liberal Bourassa, QC

Okay, thank you.

We all know that, as members of Parliament, in accordance with the bylaws, we have to make proper use of the funds and goods Parliament allocates to us.

When I was elected in 2013, NDP members took action—and are still taking action—to enable them to send out householders and ten percenters, and to have satellite offices. Granted, proactive disclosure didn't exist. Now that proactive disclosure has been implemented and ministers' mandate letters are published, could parliamentarians' overuse of Parliament funds be prevented?

4:50 p.m.

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

Suzanne Legault

You will understand that it is not really appropriate for me to comment on the way parliamentarians are using funds.

As I said earlier, any proactive disclosure is entirely welcome and appropriate, provided that cases where exemptions are applied are subject to oversight by the information commissioner.

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

Emmanuel Dubourg Liberal Bourassa, QC

I have one last question.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bob Zimmer

You're out of time.

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

Emmanuel Dubourg Liberal Bourassa, QC

Okay, thank you.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bob Zimmer

The next five-minute round will go to MP Cullen.

4:50 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

I have a question about this whole notion of “vexatious” or “too many documents”. What is too many?

You mentioned “a large number” in your submission. Who determines what “a large number” is? Your office has about 1000 pages as a benchmark; above that is considered large, and below that, not, but I notice that Treasury Board thinks it's 500.

What worries me in Bill C-58 are these subjective terms. The application of “vexatious”, “too large”, or “inconvenient” to government is defined by whom? Can you help us out there?

4:50 p.m.

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

Suzanne Legault

Yes, I have a lot of concern with regard to that provision that would allow institutions to refuse to process requests when there is such a large number of records.

I think that the provisions that exist now are sufficient. There is a duty to assist that exists. The request has to be sufficiently detailed so that a reasonable employee in an institution can assess what it is.

4:50 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Let me go there just for a second. The government has portrayed this as an attempt to help people get to the right information by forcing them to state the subject matter. If somebody writes and submits a general request, the duty to assist within that department means that someone is going to correspond with the requester and say, “I would like to help you out. Narrow your request so that I can get you the information you want.”

That exists right now?

4:50 p.m.

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

4:50 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

However, if it's required in law and if it's not there up front, then the request can be denied under Bill C-58.

4:50 p.m.

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

4:50 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

That's less helpful.

The current practice is that if somebody writes in and is not specific, but asks a very broad thing, then the Department of Justice or Transport says that this request is very broad and corresponds with them through the access to information department to find out whether the requester wants information on this part of the rail service or that part. The requester can then have correspondence and get the information that he or she wants, to avoid the department having to spend millions of dollars or whatever the scenario is. Is that the current practice?

4:50 p.m.

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

Suzanne Legault

The current practice is to try to assess what the requesters are looking for and to assist them in formulating their requests in a way that is appropriate.

4:50 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Canadian don't always know what the Access to Information Act applies to. They don't know the internal workings of the departments. They are just trying to find out about, for example, noise from trains going through Canadian towns and what the regulations are. They are not going to know specifically where, when, and what. The department should help them find that out.

4:50 p.m.

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

Suzanne Legault

Yes.

There is another issue here. There are instances of requesters not wanting to provide all of those three requirements when they make a request.

4:50 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Why not?

4:50 p.m.

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

Suzanne Legault

The requester might be an investigative journalist like Daniel Leblanc. In 2000, he wanted to have a broad spectrum to basically see the records that would be—

4:50 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

How the program was working—

4:50 p.m.

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

Suzanne Legault

—related to the sponsorship budget.

One other issue that was mentioned by some of your witnesses from institutions is that of people requesting subject headers. The requesters sometimes request a list of subject headers because then they only ask specifically for certain emails or certain information. We've had complaints related to that, so I fully understand that practice.