Evidence of meeting #48 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 system.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:30 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC
Thank you very much.
Mr. Koltun, you pointed out earlier that there was some type of backlog in the courts. People requesting access to IRCC, their files and officers' notes are being refused access to their documents.
On what grounds are people who make refugee claims denied access to their files?
5:30 p.m.
Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association
I'd like to clarify that point. When applicants are refused, they're not refused access to their records in ATIP; they're refused their immigration applications. They're seeking the reasons for refusal.
The reason immigration applicants are going to the Federal Court is that the Federal Court offers an end way around the ATIP system. Whereas an ATIP will often take more than 60 days, or more than 90 days, or sometimes up to a year, when you go to the Federal Court and your application for leave is approved, the Federal Court will make an order and will ask IRCC to produce that record for you. Similarly, when you file a notice of application for leave and judiciary review, automatically the Federal Court will request from IRCC the production of the reasons for refusal.
That is why applicants are going to the Federal Court. In many cases, once they obtain those reasons, they then discontinue the application itself. They're not interested in pursuing the refusal. They're interested in using the court to obtain the reasons for refusal.
5:35 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC
All right. In other words, if I want to know why a claim has been rejected, I can't go through IRCC. I need to go through the courts, which causes delays. Is that it?
5:35 p.m.
Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association
You can go through IRCC and you will be waiting months. When the deadline to challenge your refusal is 15 days or 60 days, you're waiting beyond the time you can take to challenge an unjustified refusal.
5:35 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC
People like asylum seekers, for example, have likely returned to their country without knowing why their claim was rejected.
5:35 p.m.
Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association
I will clarify that for asylum seekers it is very different. When they have their hearing at the Immigration and Refugee Board, the IRB will provide reasons. For immigration applications, it's primarily outside-of-Canada applicants, such as visas, work permits and study permits, and also in-Canada equivalents for those same types of applications.
5:35 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC
Thank you.
I'd like to ask you a very quick question. Yesterday, Kirk LaPointe—
5:35 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC
Okay.
Kirk LaPointe appeared before this committee. He told us that, for the past 12 years, he has had his students do an exercise where they requested documents, and no documents have ever been provided to them within the 90-day deadline.
Have you ever received documents you've requested within the 90-day deadline? Could you simply answer yes or no, please?
5:35 p.m.
President, BC Freedom of Information and Privacy Association
I'm sorry. I missed the first part of that question, but I think it was addressed to me.
I have in some instances, yes, but not sufficiently to make it a pedagogically viable exercise within the scope of a semester. Quite often, people get the experience of filing and getting some correspondence but not the satisfaction of being able to analyze the results and follow up.
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Mr. Larsen, for being quick on that.
Thank you, Mr. Simard.
Next we go to Mr. Green for two and a half minutes.
Go ahead, Matthew.
5:35 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Thank you very much.
I want to reference an article from March 2022 by author Andrea Conte, who talked about the delays in access to information as being a form of “administrative sabotage”. I know that's a loaded term, but I want to allow the witnesses to provide their response on whether they believe these delays are part of administrative sabotage.
Mr. Larsen, I'll begin with you.
5:35 p.m.
President, BC Freedom of Information and Privacy Association
Thank you for the question.
I think one thing, just to rephrase this a little bit, is to think about the whether the delays we have in the system are a bug or a feature, and from whose perspective.
Right now, the idea that there are systemic delays works in the interest of keeping information from the public, especially when it pertains to timely matters. I'm very sympathetic, as a historical researcher, to the challenges of getting access to historical records, but quite often we need timely records.
5:35 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Thank you, sir.
Mr. Barnes, within the same context, I think about Mr. Michael Dagg, who had a request for access to information that was estimated to have an 80-year response time. Would you consider this to be a form of administrative sabotage?
5:35 p.m.
Senior Fellow, Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Canadian Foreign Intelligence History Project
Yes. There are ways in which departments frequently use the mechanisms within the current process to sabotage responses. In particular, for the kind of records I'm dealing with, it involves essentially weaponizing the consultation process.
Library and Archives is basically told by other departments not to release records without consulting, and then when Library—
5:35 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I'd like to intervene, sir. I have 30 seconds left.
Are you aware that there were reports, according to a senior library archivist, that over 80% of the archives stored in the LAC are not top secret? In other words, their “top secret” vaults contain information that ought not to be top secret.
5:40 p.m.
Senior Fellow, Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Canadian Foreign Intelligence History Project
I can't comment on that directly.
5:40 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I'll go on to the question about administrative sabotage.
Mr. Koltun, do you agree with that notion?
5:40 p.m.
Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association
From a perspective of IRCC as it applies to immigration applicants, it's less sabotage and more complacency.
5:40 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Perfect.
Rounding it out, Kukpi7 Wilson, would you consider this to be a form of administrative sabotage?
5:40 p.m.
Secretary Treasurer, Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs
I believe it is, because many of our nations had delayed responses and delayed information, and then we'd get information back and it would be all blacklined.
5:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Mr. Green.
Mr. Gourde, you have the floor for five minutes.
5:40 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lévis—Lotbinière, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Larson, in your opening remarks, when you talked about the access to information issues we have with federal institutions, you mentioned a culture of secrecy and lack of transparency.
Do you feel that over the long term, this could make Canadians more cynical and distrustful of Canadian institutions?