I don't think so. I would say the problem is universal. In Canada, it's the same for a firm as it is for a public servant. Not all requests a public servant receives are equally important or of equal priority. Some emails are just friendly communications, depending on the situation. A public servant writing an email today certainly isn't thinking about the fact that the email could be part of a chain that ends up being disclosed under the Access to Information Act. If they did, they would be more disciplined in their communications, and there might be more substance in the records.
That's how it is nowadays, so we have no choice but to deal with these situations. In the case of a dispute, you might have a lengthy email chain that needs to be redacted because it contains information that is personal or subject to solicitor-client privilege. That has led to considerably more work for those responsible for access to information. Compared with the days of handwritten memos and documents, today, the volume of interpersonal communications is significantly higher.
That's the world we live in, and I don't think we can escape it. That's the sort of bureaucracy that has to be expected when an ATI request is made and when it's processed.