Information & Ethics Committee on Nov. 23rd, 2022

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

Thank you very much, Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for their very compelling testimony today.

I'll start with the Immigration Lawyers Association and Mr. Koltun.

I understand that about 73.9% of ATI requests in the top five departments for Canada were filed in IRCC. I guess my question to you is more of a practical one: Has it just become a standard procedure for an immigration lawyer, as part of the process of providing supports to their clients, to make an ATI request as the file just progresses on a regular basis? Do you think that is clogging up the system?

[Andrew Koltun]

It's a fair question.

Increasingly, IRCC has stopped communicating with applicants. Delays in applications reach years now, because there's a an application backlog of 2.5 million. Oftentimes, the only way to get a sense of why there's a delay is to file an ATIP.

As a matter of course, are immigration lawyers filing an ATIP for every single client? Generally, yes. It's not to clog up the system; it's because there's no other information available to immigration applicants. An immigration applicant cannot go to an IRCC office and ask to speak to a front clerk like you can at Service Canada.

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

Thanks for that. I really appreciate it.

Do you think there's a correlation between successful service delivery within departments and the number of ATI requests that are made?

[Andrew Koltun]

I would say yes. Unhappy applicants file ATIP requests to understand what went wrong.

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

Thanks for that.

I will move on to Mr. Larsen.

Mr. Larsen, at our last meeting, we heard from Mr. Wernick and from other witnesses as well about Canada's international ranking on how open and transparent we are in comparison to other countries. I can list it. Canada is second out of 85, according to U.S. News & World Report. Open Data Watch ranks Canada at 15. A rule of law index from the World Justice Project ranks Canada on open government 13th out of 140.

What is your take, Mr. Larsen, on where Canada is in respect to the rest of the world?

[Mike Larsen]

Thank you for that. It's a good question.

I think there needs to be a differentiation between access to information and open governments. I've been really heartened by a lot of open government initiatives that I've seen the Government of Canada take over the last 10 years. A more active and proactive release of datasets I think does put us not necessarily at the head of the pack but certainly in a progressive way.

Open data is one thing. The robust access to information regime with legislated proactive disclosure is something different. In that regard, I think we have fallen behind. Canada was once regarded very much as a leader in transparency and access to information. I think we've slid. We've been complacent. We've left some systems unchanged for too long. We're no longer leading in the way that we could or should be, and we have the potential to do that.

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

Thanks for that.

Just to carry on with that, this is obviously not just a Canadian problem. It's becoming more and more a worldwide problem with respect to misinformation, disinformation and a general mistrust of governments in general. How does that play into ATI requests or requests for information from governments, not just in Canada but elsewhere as well?

[Mike Larsen]

This is a very important question. I think people sometimes interpret the systemic delays in processes.... I had an RCMP request take five years recently. That was a record for me. FIPA often hears from people who interpret it this way: “There's something to hide. There's something sinister. There's no reason the government would withhold this information if everything was indeed above board.” Therefore, they jump to some conclusions about this.

My position is that typically there isn't necessarily some sinister or nefarious motive—although certainly these things can be weaponized—but rather that there's a lack of effectiveness in the system that creates backlogs and delays. People are free to interpret the reasons for that.

If someone is filing their very first request, as many of the people we work with do, since they're not frequent users, and they hit a brick wall with filing an access request and lose faith in the system, that can only amplify other concerns they have, legitimate or otherwise, around the functioning of our democracy.

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

Thank you very much.

Thank you to all the witnesses.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you.

First, I want to thank all the witnesses who were here on Zoom and in person. I found today's information extremely valuable. I'm sure it will form a big part of our report.

I also want to thank those of you who reached out to us asking to be part of this study. We will continue this study on December 5 and December 7.

The input you've given us today, as I said earlier, has been extremely valuable.

Kukpi7, I do see your hand.

[Chief Judy Wilson]

I just wanted to note an important study we did entitled Full Disclosure: Canada’s Conflict of Interest in Controlling First Nations’ Access to Information. That was in November 2022. It was submitted by the National Claims Research Directors and Union of BC Indian Chiefs. It was a discussion paper respecting a one-year review of the Access to Information Act and modernization of the Privacy Act.

I just wanted to make sure that it was on record and that we mentioned that it was conducted.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

I do appreciate that, Kukpi7. Thank you for bringing that to our attention.

Again, thank you to all the witnesses.

Thank you to the committee members.

Thank you also, Mr. Simard, for staying with us today and throughout the week.

The meeting is now adjourned.