Evidence of meeting #52 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.
6:10 p.m.
As an Individual
To be honest, I don't have that expert knowledge, but I imagine that exists. The American system is not perfect when it comes to censorship, delays, appeals and so on, but this problem is more prevalent here in Canada.
6:10 p.m.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Conte.
Mr. Tromp, you make 206 recommendations in your report. What would the two chief recommendations be?
6:10 p.m.
As an Individual
I believe the cabinet exclusion should be converted into a mandatory exemption, and also the commissioner should have the right to view the records to see that they are properly classified.
As well, the second would be the policy advice exemption, which needs a harms test, a 10-year limit and a clear statement that background and facts cannot be withheld as analysis.
That's a good start anyway, but there's more.
6:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Mr. Villemure.
Mr. Green, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.
6:10 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Mr. Beeby, in a blog post you stated that in 2009, an aide to a Public Works minister blocked the release of a document you requested. It was reported that this was a clear case of political interference, but the RCMP dropped their preliminary investigation. In your opinion, why was the investigation dropped?
6:10 p.m.
As an Individual
Well, I don't have access to RCMP files. The RCMP investigated that case. I know only that they announced that they would not lay charges against that individual. However, I understand that the problem was proving criminal intent. There's a section in the act about criminal penalties, but to meet that standard you have to prove intent. I think they were somehow not able to show that in that case.
6:10 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Do you, then, have any recommendations regarding who might be more adequate, given this grey area, to investigate these kinds of cases?
6:10 p.m.
As an Individual
This case is interesting because it had to do with a political aide to a minister. One quirk of the access act is that the Information Commissioner, when she discovers some bad behaviour by a political aide, cannot ask the justice minister, the Attorney General, to investigate because they're somehow exempt from her purview. This is a real problem with the act that could be fixed so simply, and I think that's one loophole we have to close.
I'm not sure if that answers your question.
6:15 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
That's perfect, but could you be specific about how you would propose to close that loop? Are you then suggesting to bring political aides into the regime of oversight?
6:15 p.m.
As an Individual
Bring political aides into the same arena as all public servants, so they have to be held accountable for their bad behaviour in withholding or destroying records.
6:15 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
In your opinion, could it still present a problem if you have the Attorney General and Minister of Justice being ultimately left with the decision whether to pursue, prosecute, or investigate political staffers?
6:15 p.m.
As an Individual
Well, they don't. They merely refer it to the RCMP, and then the Public Prosecution Service. We do have some arm's-length institutions that I think would take care of that conflict of interest.
6:15 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Perhaps you have more faith in those than I do.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Those are my questions.
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Mr. Green.
The last two committee members to speak will be Mr. Gourde and Mr. Fergus, who will have two and a half minutes each.
Mr. Gourde, you have the floor.
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lévis—Lotbinière, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My question is for all the witnesses.
If I ask a minister in the House a question and he does not know the answer, because it is not in his notes or for some other reason, he will ask his political advisors to hold a briefing within the next 24 hours to be brought up to speed on the matter, in case I were to ask him the same question the next day.
If you were to ask that same question, would you expect an answer in as reasonable a timeframe as 24 hours or would it likely be in about two years?
Mr. Beeby, you may answer first.
6:15 p.m.
As an Individual
This is the double frustration of being a journalist. You're not only waiting for answers from access to information, but you're waiting literally weeks sometimes for answers from departments and ministers' offices. I would be waiting at least as long as you are.
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
6:15 p.m.
President, Canadian Association of Journalists
Yes, I think that would be a fair assessment. To reiterate my point, we need to move toward a culture of openness and default to openness. Otherwise, situations will only continue to get worse.
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
6:15 p.m.
As an Individual
The purpose of all my work is to raise Canada's FOI law to accepted global standards. That's not a radical or unreasonable goal at all, because MPs do not need to leap into the future, but merely step into the present. We are now rated 52nd in the world with regard to our FOI law quality. We could obviously do much better than that.
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Mr. Gourde.
Mr. Fergus, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.