Information & Ethics Committee on May 16th, 2022

[The Chair, Conservative, Pat Kelly]

With that, we'll now go to Mr. Kurek.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Thank you very much.

I appreciate your candour with us here today, Commissioner.

One of the challenges that I've noted over the course of the last two and a half years or so is a huge shortage of ATIP officers. There are just not enough staff within departments to fulfill ATIPs. Is that something that's consistent, in your experience and understanding, across the whole of government?

[Caroline Maynard]

It totally is. Some institutions have told us that they actually have the financial means to hire more people, but they just can't find people to work in that field. It's a very difficult job because you are always between the person who wants the information yesterday and the institution that doesn't want to give it or that is taking time to gather the information, and then you're fighting back and forth.

It's not an easy position, and it's also very difficult to get training. I heard that TBS is now starting a project in which they're going to be hiring a pool of candidates so they can share with institutions and hopefully provide training for these individuals. I'm hoping that's going to work and alternatively will help institutions.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

You've referenced the use of technology, using things like artificial intelligence and that sort of thing. Are there comparable jurisdictions around the world to which we can point to say that they're doing that well, jurisdictions whose legislation, policy, practice or that sort of thing we could possibly emulate?

[Caroline Maynard]

I'm not aware of any specific country that would have better technology. I'm sure there are some. It's really difficult to compare sometimes with some other countries. We know that we have departments like the Department of Fisheries and Oceans that have put in place some systems that really help them respond to access requests in a timely manner. CSIS is actually pretty good. I know they're not providing a lot of information, but finding the information for them is not a question. There are good practices here in Canada.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

There's a reason to make sure those good practices are forwarded across government.

I know over the course of some of the ATIP requests that I've done, there are gaps, in part, because there will have been a presentation that was done where information was referenced maybe in an email or a letter, but that information is not available in an ATIP request. Phone calls are made. An email says, “Give me a call and we can discuss further.” How do we ensure that there is that openness and transparency, when, whether intentional or not, there are ways to circumvent the system?

[Caroline Maynard]

Right now, our federal government does not have a legislated duty to document, so our institutions are left to document what they want. They are encouraged to always take notes and make sure that big policy decisions are being saved somewhere, but there are no consistencies. Now with working from home, it's even worse.

We've had our first case where somebody asked for a videotaping of a team meeting, which is new to our government. The team meeting was not recorded, and nobody took the time to even take minutes during that meeting. This is new, and people have to find ways. You don't have to record, but you still have to have somebody take minutes at meetings. You still have to make sure it's filed properly so that when there's an access request, you can find it. A duty to document in legislation would definitely help that.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

I appreciate that, and the acknowledgement of the fact that those gaps do currently exist. Because there's currently very little documentation, I would suggest it's impossible to know how much information is lacking because of that gap.

In terms of COVID and the “working from home” side of things and the huge increase in access to information requests, in your letter to Minister Duclos, you talk about how there's a lack of understanding of the act and the duties associated with that. Is an effort needed across government to make sure that understanding is brought to a level consistent across all of government?

[The Chair, Conservative, Pat Kelly]

Mr. Kurek, you really did start a lengthy question with only a few seconds left, so I will allow the witness to answer briefly, if she cares to, or perhaps let that come out in additional testimony.

[Caroline Maynard]

I understand that Minister Duclos and his office have informed the institutions that they cannot stop working with.... They have a legislative obligation to respond to access requests, and we've done the same thing. We've seen that some units completely shut down during COVID, and that was unacceptable.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pat Kelly]

Thank you.

We have Ms. Saks for up to five minutes.

[Ya'ara Saks, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank you, Madam Maynard, for joining us today. It's been a really important discussion. We've moved beyond the estimates, but I think this is the best place to unpack how we best serve you with the budgets that are before us.

I want to take note that since 2015, the government has invested over $50 million in incremental funding to improve Canadians' access to information, but we've talked today about the backlogs and the increases to the budget, in some years quite significant. With $50 million in investments when we're looking here in 2022, do we see more transparency than we did, let's say, 10 years ago, 20 years ago, or are we still doing this delicate balance, because the volume is so high that the investments are keeping us at the same level of transparency decade after decade?

[Caroline Maynard]

I think because the number of requests has increased so much—like I said earlier, 225% in six years—there is definitely more information out there. There are a lot more requests. There's a lot more interest, but we can definitely do more, and it's not just by putting money in units. We need to provide voluntary disclosure, proactive disclosure. We have to invest in other means because we're never going to have enough resources if we can't give the information without having recourse to an access request.

My office is never going to be big enough and institutions are never going to be sufficiently resourced to respond to the surge.

[Ya'ara Saks, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Thank you.

We've also talked about how when individuals make requests there's a hesitancy or they almost gate themselves in terms of cabinet confidentiality, saying I can't ask for this. They're saying, I know I can't ask for this so I'm not going to ask for this. It's going to be a two-part question.

First, why is cabinet confidentiality important? Second, since cabinet confidentiality currently is a fundamental element of the system of government that we have, do you think it's important that this candour be protected? First, why is it important and why is it part of the system that we have, and second, what would more openness look like?

[Caroline Maynard]

I really think I agree that it's important for ministers and cabinets to be able to discuss frankly and openly policies, legislation and changes to what's going to happen to Canada in a protected way.

When I ask for the authority to review those cabinet confidences, it's not to disclose them. That's the thing I think most people don't understand. It's really to make sure that we are using the exclusion as cabinet confidence appropriately. Right now there's no way to challenge that.

What I would like is to continue to protect cabinet confidence, but have some review mechanism so we know that any government is doing it appropriately and not abusing this exemption.

[Ya'ara Saks, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

In the recommendations that you put forward previously, has there been some discussion of that in setting up the parameters of a framework of what could be considered, or have we not gotten there yet?

[Ya'ara Saks, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Okay.

How much time do I have, Mr. Chair?

[Caroline Maynard]

No, we're not there yet.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pat Kelly]

You have a minute and 15 seconds. You can split your time, if you like.

[Ya'ara Saks, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

I'm going to split my time with my colleague, Ms. Hepfner.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pat Kelly]

You have a minute and 10 seconds.

[Lisa Hepfner, Liberal, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to move the motion that I gave oral notice of, I believe, a week or so ago. I'll read it out if that's appropriate. I move:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study that examines the issue of digital surveillance by employers of Canadians who work from home, including the prevalence of digital surveillance by employers, what type of surveillance is being collected, how personal surveillance data is being stored and secured, what rules are in place to protect employees' privacy rights while working from home and data collection disclosure and permission rights of employees; and that the committee report its findings and recommendations to the House.

I know that there was discussion at the time that this seemed to some members to be similar to the AI study that we proposed, but it's actually totally different. It's not just about AI. It's about the fact that more and more people are working from home and employers seem to be taking greater liberties in what sorts of intrusions they can make into people's privacy. It's about the bigger issue of people working from home and what sort of privacy they are afforded and what sort of privacy they're due and how we protect those privacy rights when people are isolated from their other employees and their unions and working on their own at home.

What my colleague Michael Coteau has found is that there's been a significant increase in surveillance by employers over their employees working from home. It's not just about AI. It's about how we protect the privacy of people who are working from home. It's become a big issue because of the pandemic with so many more people working remotely. I think it's important and I think it's beyond AI.

I'll finish with that. Thanks.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pat Kelly]

Is there any debate? There being no debate, we'll vote on the motion.

I think I saw Mr. Bains's hand.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Mr. Chair, can we have a recorded vote?

(Motion negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)

[The Chair, Conservative, Pat Kelly]

Ms. Hepfner, I had about 45 seconds left in your speaking round if you wish to put a question to the Commissioner. Otherwise, we will go with the next speaker.