Evidence of meeting #42 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was rubin.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Mr. Villemure.
Finally, MP Desjarlais, you have two and a half minutes.
5:35 p.m.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I just want to thank the witnesses again for being present here today. I think it's really important information. I've learned a lot. I think what I want to take away from this for sure is that there is a cost to systemic and cultural problems with the interpretation of the right to access to information. I hear that, full stop.
I want to thank Mr. Rubin for highlighting the costs to Canadians. Residential schools, bribery, scandal, private corporation bailouts, the issues we're seeing at Hockey Canada, the armed forces, RCMP—these are real costs to Canadians, to their rights, and to their ability to actually understand these circumstances and how they're being impacted and harmed. I feel that and I hear that plainly today, so I want to thank you for that.
Recently, of course, we've seen even more suppression, such as the suppression of 10,000 documents by the Minister of Justice in relation to residential school survivors in a current case that's before the court. This is happening in live time, still today, so this isn't going away. These problems are mounting over and over and over.
Mr. Rubin, I don't have much time, but I would like you to give some remarks in relation to the statutory review of the Access to Information Act. You mentioned in your statement that you're not going to participate, but for someone with your knowledge and expertise, there has to be wisdom there in the reason. Could you please explain why you don't want to participate in this process?
5:35 p.m.
Investigative Researcher and Transparency Advocate, As an Individual
It's because it's a pretend phony review built into the act. All they want to do is promote their idea of proactive disclosure, which is really phony. All they want to do is make little changes to the act. They don't want real changes. Then they want you to believe that they agree that you should hear this.
Take the example of the residential schools. I've applied for different indigenous groups for records. It's kind of disgraceful that they or their land claims researchers can't get certain records or have to wait so long for them. The harm was so great, and yet they're getting exemptions, such as from the RCMP, saying that sexual assault or other things were connected to those files and they can't release them. Well, I think it's high time they said, “You've done the harm—including the RCMP—so you damn well release them.”
5:35 p.m.
NDP
5:35 p.m.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
I just want to again thank the witnesses for their testimony today. It means a lot.
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, MP Desjarlais. I guess I could have given you Mr. Gourde's extra 10 seconds or Mr. Villemure's time.
I want to thank the witnesses for coming today.
This panel was supposed to go until six o'clock, and then we were going to follow that up with committee business. With votes, we're going to have to cut it short. I would invite you to submit any information that perhaps you may have missed to the committee as part of our study.
I want to thank you all—Mr. Conacher, Mr. Rubin, and Mr. Cutler—for coming in today. You serve Canadians well, and I thank you for taking the time to be with the committee today.
I believe I do have consent, unless there is any objection, to adjourn the meeting.
The meeting is adjourned.