I would like to continue along the same lines.
Would the solution be to have tighter deadlines, not only tighter but also mandatory deadlines?
I often use the example of the Department of National Defence to show the importance of deadlines. That department asked for a delay of 1,110 days to respond to a request without necessarily explaining why it had done so. The department actually told the requesting party that it needed 1,110 days to respond to the request. It provided no explanations. Unfortunately, Canadians have no choice but to accept such delays.
What do you think about a process that would require shorter deadlines, but that would also include a requirement to provide a logical, well-founded reason for having to extend a deadline? Ultimately, the commissioner is the one deciding whether the delay is truly warranted.
Mr. Wudrick and Mr. Holman, can you answer that question?