Information & Ethics Committee on Nov. 23rd, 2022

[Andrew Koltun]

I would reiterate the same recommendation I've done: a strong time limit on the length of an extension that can be imposed and, quite honestly, the proactive release of reasons for refusal to applicants when they are rejected in their immigration applications.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

I'll ask Mr. Barnes the same question, as well.

In the short term, if we want to improve access to certain historical documents, what can we do?

[Alan Barnes]

Many things could be done. If I had to pick one specific thing, I would say greater restraints on the weaponizing of the consultation process. Departments are using the consultation process to kick the can down the road. The department that's consulted takes years to respond, yet nothing happens. I think that needs to be tightened up.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Simard.

Thank you, Mr. Barnes.

We go next to Mr. Green for two and a half minutes.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you.

In keeping with my rapid-fire way of going through the list of questions with the witnesses, I'm going to put the following question to those who have been at this for quite some time.

I watched with interest the government propose a minister of digital government who I thought had a mandate that was supposed to help fix some of the stuff in terms of the way IT moved across the whole of government. From July 2018 to October 2021, they had it, and then unceremoniously dumped it.

Mr. Larsen, were you ever involved in consultations with that ministry? Did you provide any feedback on ways in which they might be able to help streamline services that might ultimately include access to information?

[Mike Larsen]

The straightforward answer is that FIPA didn't consult on that particular project. We were interested in the idea of a digital charter and we saw the obvious intersections with transparency and access to information, particularly proactive disclosure, but we haven't had an opportunity to consult on that.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

It wasn't around long enough, I guess.

Mr. Barnes, how about you?

[Alan Barnes]

I wasn't involved in any of those consultations.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Were you aware of the ministry, and, in your opinion, do you think it offered any opportunity to provide a better access to information regime?

[Alan Barnes]

I'd have to leave that to the other witnesses. It really is outside my area of expertise.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Koltun, I'll try you.

[Andrew Koltun]

To my knowledge, CILA was not invited to those consultations. Again, we're also straying outside my area of expertise.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Kukpi7 Wilson, obviously there would be a whole host of ways in which, theoretically, the potential minister for digital government might help improve some of the services provided through any of the ministries intersecting with first nations.

Were you or your colleagues ever consulted on this minister of digital government?

[Chief Judy Wilson]

To my knowledge, we were not contacted in any way, shape or form about that ministry.

Jody, can you verify that?

[Jody Woods]

Nope. I don't think I can say more than that.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I used to be on the government operations committee, and I watched with interest and hope that the government could provide a better pathway forward for services, programs and access to information, and then it just disappeared.

I just wanted to contemplate that with my last round, and I thank all the witnesses for their subject matter expertise.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Green.

For those witnesses and committee members who are wondering why we're not hearing the lucid tones of Mr. Barrett today, I filed an ATIP, and he lost his voice over the weekend. It just came back, so that was quick.

Next we're going to Mr. Kurek.

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

Thank you very much, Chair.

Normally I do this after the meeting, but while I have the floor, I want to thank not only the witnesses but everybody else who makes committee proceedings possible, like the clerk, the analysts, and of course the IT and building services people. That's just a quick note here before I jump into my questions. Often that's stated after the fact, but I'm glad to get it on the record.

Mr. Koltun, I'm curious, because this is one of those unique situations involving ATIPs. Access to information is a big part of it, but it bleeds over into the functionality of a department.

Can you comment on both the access to information side of things and whether there are some practical recommendations this committee could ask the government to act on to simply change the system so that people aren't forced to file ATIPs to get basic information and don't have to refile ATIPs to get an understanding as to why ATIPs weren't disclosed or what was redacted, etc.?

If in about a minute you could expand on that, it would be great.

[Andrew Koltun]

Currently IRCC has gone through a systematic revamp of their applications in making everything digital first. At the same time, the information that applicants are seeking is digital. It's stored in the GCMS, IRCC's database. In many cases, the GCMS notes are pre-flagged for whether they're sensitive or should be excluded from an ATIP request.

There should be a very simple compatibility between IRCC's new portals and an applicant's internal application in officers' notes. An ATIP request should not be filed. Applicants should just be able to see it through their portal.

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

Thank you very much.

I would cede the rest of my time to Monsieur Gourde.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lévis—Lotbinière, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Kurek.

I'll continue along the same lines.

Mr. Koltun, in terms of immigration cases that require an access to information request, what is the failure rate for those types of requests? There are stakeholders who help people make access to information requests. My impression is that there aren't many cases where requesters can complete a request themselves. They have to use lawyers like you or deal with their MP's office to see what the problem is.

It's difficult for me to know what the success rate is, because you never hear about the files that went well. In my constituency office, we only hear about cases that don't go well.

On your side, you may know more. Are there any cases where it goes well?

[Andrew Koltun]

No.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Andrew Koltun]

To put a couple of numbers together for you, for the end of 2023, IRCC is projected to receive 223,000 ATIP requests. Of those, it's projected by the OIC that about 6,000 will result in ATIP complaints. Similarly, IRCC's office itself predicts that if 20% of all eligible applicants file an ATIP or privacy request for their information, there would be 775,000 requests by the end of 2024.

The volume is increasing. It will only increase, and it will continue to drain the resources of the OIC.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Gourde.

There has been consensus among the parties that this will be the last five-minute question.

Ms. Khalid, you have the floor for five minutes.