Information & Ethics Committee on March 7th, 2023

[Caroline Maynard]

In my document, I provided you with the institutions that we're receiving the most complaints about. It's not always because they received the most complaints that they're the worst. Often it's the percentage and the number of requests they're receiving.

What we see across the board is that section 21 is being overused and abused. Section 21 allows you to redact advice and recommendations made by a department official. It's not well described. The exemptions are very broadly written. It's often used to redact information that is not advice and recommendations. That's definitely a problem across government.

In my submission, I made some specific recommendations to rewrite the exemptions. For example, in Ontario, they have a very good list of things that it should not include. That would be very helpful for this.

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

I will take somewhat of a different direction on that, which is about including the MOs and the PMO in the access to information regime. I just want to give you the opportunity, in 45 seconds or so, hopefully. Then I'd like to ask you a question in a different direction.

Could you provide a little bit more context as to how you could see that working to ensure that there's that accountability that Canadians expect?

[Caroline Maynard]

This government is making a lot of decisions that are being discussed in cabinet ministers' offices and in the Prime Minister's Office. When we see documents that have gone to these offices, they're all redacted.

You have to determine where the cut off is. When does it become the bureaucrats versus the government?

I think that having a transparent government means that everybody who's elected and everybody who makes decisions on behalf of the government, including ministers' offices, should be subjected to the act so that Canadians are confident they are getting all the information they're entitled to.

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

I appreciate that. Certainly in my experience with the ATIP system, it's been incredibly frustrating. Even when MPs have been promised information, they then have to go through the ATIP system as a last resort and then are not able to get the information that, in some cases, we saw during a briefing or whatever was the case. I can tell you, there's an incredible amount of frustration.

I want to change gears in the last minute and a half or so that I have.

It's on technology. You mentioned that the act is 40 years old. There's been a massive amount of technological development in terms of both communications and the way decisions are made. In about a minute, perhaps you could summarize or make some recommendations about how this committee could create the path forward for addressing the challenges that technology has brought to the access to information regime. Perhaps you also have some recommendations as to how technology could be part of the solution to ensure that there is a greater level of accountability within government.

[Caroline Maynard]

There is definitely a need for investment in technology. We are in 2023 and this government is lacking in terms of using artificial intelligence. IRCC, actually, is using bots—robots—to identify some information. It's making great progress. It has actually had great results.

I think the other problem in government is that everybody is working in silos. When I want to increase my capacity in my office for infrastructure, I have to hire my own consultants and spend my own money. The next institution is doing the same thing. I think that a platform where everybody could use all this technology and share the information.... I think that Treasury Board has great projects and stuff, but we need to see it more. We need to see that exchange of information.

IRCC is definitely on the right path, but we haven't seen the results yet.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Kurek.

Ms. Khalid, you have the final round for five minutes.

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

Thanks very much, Chair.

Ms. Maynard, in your previous testimony, you mentioned that a way to improve government documentation would be to delete emails with no corporate value and simply record meeting minutes on memos to eliminate the need to retain specific email chains. The report appears to agree with you on the need to improve that documentation. Do you believe that making this change would reduce that workload?

[Caroline Maynard]

Definitely. You have no idea how many requests we see that have hundreds of the same emails and pages. The analysts have no choice but to process and treat them. We are getting more and more access requests that result in thousands of pages. It used to not be very often. The elimination of fees has definitely had a big impact on that, but that's not the only thing. The lack of management information is definitely key.

We need to better manage it so that Canadian requesters are getting what they want and not the same thing 25 times.

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

I hear that. I hate email chains, to be honest.

On a different note, the report concludes that implementing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples requires changing the definition of an aboriginal government.

Do you agree with that? What are your thoughts?

[Caroline Maynard]

I do. Right now I think that there are only 13 nations that are part of that definition. I've heard from them that it is definitely an issue.

I think it's great that they've been consulted through this round for the review. I hope that their concerns will be addressed.

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

What are your thoughts on the recommendations identified in the report on advancing indigenous reconciliation?

I know we talk about the whole of government. In my opinion, this is literally what it looks like, department by department. What is your honest take on how that's addressed in the report?

[Caroline Maynard]

I will be honest with you. I think that this is a subject that is so important that I would let the experts deal with that.

I think that indigenous people should be talking to you about whether or not the report goes far enough in their view. They've been consulted, but whether or not the report has made recommendations that will respond to their concerns.... They have very specific concerns, and I think it's really worth listening to them.

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

Have you met with them? Have you received their consultations yourself? Do you have anything to share in that respect?

[Caroline Maynard]

No, I'm not part of the consultation process. I have met with them in terms of how I can help them and how my office deals with complaints from their offices and groups.

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

Do you have one issue to share that is their biggest concern?

[Caroline Maynard]

Their biggest concern is timelines, again. It's delays. Getting information for them is key. They have to have this information to pursue their requests. They need information to be provided to them informally. They shouldn't have to ask for information through an access request.

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

Thank you very much, Ms. Maynard. I appreciate that.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Ms. Khalid.

I'm going to take a few minutes. I have a couple of questions and a comment.

You mentioned in earlier comments, Ms. Maynard, that Canada is lagging behind legislation by 40 years. Can you give the committee an example of the gold standard in relation to some other countries as it relates to access to information?

[Caroline Maynard]

There is a link I can send you on how the statutes in different countries are being evaluated. I think Afghanistan is first, interestingly enough, and Mexico—

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Say that again.

[Caroline Maynard]

It's the act. There's legislation that is great, but then we also need to properly apply the legislation and process access.

The norms are that it should be free. Everybody in government should be subject to the act. Like I said earlier, providers of services on behalf of government should be subject to the act. The scope of the act has to be reviewed. Public interest needs to be included.

Proactive disclosure should be increased, and there should be an authority to evaluate what's being provided on the proactive disclosure list. Right now, there's nobody looking at whether people are meeting their obligations. I don't have the authority. I definitely don't have the resources to do it now.

All of these things are definitely making our act fall behind with respect to the norms.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

If anything, the report that was submitted to Parliament by the Treasury Board president has put air under the wings of this committee to come up with some substantive recommendations.

One of the things you said was that it was a good summary of the problems, but there were no solutions to the problems. In my view, a lot of what was recommended was actually punted down the line. It's not going to solve anything, so that creates a level of importance for this committee to be able to provide recommendations to the government.

We can provide...and we can table the report. Whether they do anything about it or not is up to them, but we are planning on having the President of the Treasury Board come to explain the submissions that she made to Parliament. I think that would be helpful as well. Do you agree?

[Caroline Maynard]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Okay. Thank you.

That's it. I appreciate your coming in and providing us with the information today, Ms. Maynard. It was very helpful.

Thank you to the committee members, the analysts and the clerk.

On behalf of the committee and Canadians, I want to say thank you, again, Ms. Maynard.

We're going to suspend for a few minutes and then we're going to come back in camera to deal with some committee business.

Thank you.

[Proceedings continue in camera]