Evidence of meeting #27 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was institutions.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Gabriel Hardy Conservative Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC
Okay.
How much did it cost taxpayers for your office and the government to fight about you?
Information Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
In fact, institutions are fighting against the order, of course.
As I said last week in committee, we have about three lawyer employees who are litigation experts. We're required to have that kind of additional expertise. There are two more salaries as a result of that.
Conservative
Gabriel Hardy Conservative Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC
According to the figures I have before me, the government spent $1.6 million to fight, not against you, but against your orders. Am I correct in that?
Information Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
I think that's what the government has spent on lawyers' fees in the last four years.
Conservative
Gabriel Hardy Conservative Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC
Basically, when the government challenges your access to information requests that enable Canadians to understand the scope of what's going on, it costs taxpayers more than the normal expenses, including the salaries of your office staff, to ensure that access to information is respected. That means the government spends additional money to challenge an order you have issued following an investigation. Is that correct?
Information Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
Indeed, at the end of an investigation, the order asking the government to respond gives it the option to go to court and gain more time to respond to the request.
Conservative
Gabriel Hardy Conservative Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC
The government is spending taxpayers' money to buy time, then.
Do you get the impression that Quebeckers and Canadians today have adequate access to information about the government and everything that goes on within the government? Do you feel that access is being lost faster than before? If we compare the situation 10 years ago with the situation today, do people have the same kind of access, or do they have less access than before? Are Canadians less informed than before? I think you said earlier that not having access to information encourages cynicism. Do you get the impression that this is more or less what's happening?
Information Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
I think the issue is that information can be found in many places. Nowadays, Canadians no longer know what to believe or what's reliable and true. That's why proactive disclosure and access to information have to be improved, so Canadians receive that information before they go elsewhere to look for information that may not be reliable.
Are there more requests? There are many more. We're up to 220,000 access to information requests a year. The number of requests has increased by 110%. Do requesters get a response quickly? Can they trust that information? Those are all questions that ultimately affect public trust.
Conservative
Gabriel Hardy Conservative Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC
If there was a desire to respect exactly what the Prime Minister said, namely that access to information is really important, your office should theoretically have a little more money to support access to information. Above all, it would be even easier for Canadians to find information when they request it. There would be a little less cynicism as a result. I think your office provides more relevant and reliable information than what can be found around the Internet.
Do I have a little time left, Mr. Chair?
February 9th, 2026 / 4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Your time is up.
Before continuing with Ms. Lapointe, I would like to point out that we'll have a round of questions with five minutes for the Conservatives and another five minutes for the Liberals. We can take just two minutes for Mr. Thériault to ask his question, and then we'll finish on time.
Ms. Lapointe, you have the floor for five minutes.
Liberal
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Welcome, Ms. Maynard. This isn't the first time you have appeared before the committee.
I would like to come back to what Mr. Hardy said earlier. He asked you questions about your budget, which is $15 million. You said that your resources are staying the same and won't decrease.
Have you had any discussions with the various institutions you work with to determine whether their access to information services would get fewer resources?
Information Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
Yes. I was just going to say to Mr. Hardy that it isn't me who should be getting more resources; it's really the institutions that shouldn't be making cuts to their access to information services, because that's where the information is given to Canadians.
For example, you can ask Ms. Weir, the librarian and archivist of Canada. She informed me that her budget would be cut by $15 million. For access to information, 7.5% of her budget for access to information is the same as my office's entire budget. That's one example, but there are many others. All institutions will be affected by this.
Liberal
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Okay. That wasn't my understanding.
I'll come back to some other things. Earlier, you talked about email inboxes. You said that there weren't really any tools to do that and that there should be rules for removing certain elements from email inboxes. You say that there has to be some cleaning up, which means that some things have been going on for a while. There are no guidelines on that.
You mentioned New Zealand. Are there any references?
Personally, I don't know exactly how to clean up email inboxes. You said earlier that someone would have to be put in charge. Has anyone looked into that issue, so we can learn what we need to set aside and remove from our email inboxes, and so the departments can give us guidelines? I'd like to hear your comments on that.
Information Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
My office has published a document detailing nine ways to manage email inboxes. It's a document that comes from us, because we saw a need for it. In fact, it's Treasury Board and the people responsible for information management who should ensure that everyone is equipped to understand what they need to keep in their email inbox.
However, I understand you, because it's very difficult. We offer half-days of training during which we force people to ask themselves questions. They read emails and sort them into the right place. For example, if an email contains a decision about a file, the email will be sorted into the corresponding folder, and it shouldn't remain in the inbox. We're saying people have to keep those documents if they have value, but it's important to sort them and save them in folders dedicated to those decisions.
Each institution or agency is responsible for determining the rules that apply in each case. Are there tools available? There probably are, but I'm not aware of any. There will be. Now, there are surely tools that identify what has been duplicated, so there should be tools to give us certain information.
How many times do you say “thank you” in an email? How many emails containing “thank you” have you sent? If I could delete all my “thank you” emails, that would clean things up. That's an example of a transitory message that we shouldn't keep.
Liberal
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
I agree with you, but I would go even further. At a certain point, we're flooded, as my colleague said earlier.
You talked about British Columbia, where people are now required to contribute to a data catalogue, which will support access to information. Can you tell us whether British Columbia is achieving better results? Are people receiving the requested information more quickly?
Information Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
The answer is yes and no. I think that, once again, it forces people to ask themselves questions, because the obligation exists. However, it also creates habits, including the habit of keeping everything, which means that they end up with a huge number of documents. That means there's a problem on both sides.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Ms. Lapointe.
I have been advised that Mr. Hardy and Mr. Cooper are going to share their time.
Mr. Hardy, I'll warn you when two and a half minutes have passed. The floor is yours.
Conservative
Gabriel Hardy Conservative Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Maynard, I'd like to ask you a very simple question. On the one hand, some departments automatically delete Microsoft Teams discussions after 15 days and emails after 30 days. On the other hand, there's section 67.1 of the Access to Information Act.
Do you think the method departments are using violates that section? You're shaking your head. Do you think it poses a risk to access to information? Were you consulted, or did the departments independently decide to adopt 15‑day and 30‑day periods before deletions?
Information Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
We weren't consulted, because this falls under the policies of the government, Treasury Board and Library and Archives Canada. It doesn't concern us as long as there isn't an access to information request.
If there is an access to information request and there's something relevant in a Microsoft Teams discussion, there should be a process in place that can suspend the deletion of records.
If you intend to evade that access to information request and you erase something in order to do so, that may be alleged as a criminal offence. The person really needs to know—
Conservative
Gabriel Hardy Conservative Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC
Wouldn't it have been a good idea for the departments to consult with you to ask whether they were creating a problem? In my opinion, that would have been the first step, wouldn't it?
Information Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
As I told you, that isn't within our authority.
However, last week, I sent a letter, which I forwarded to you, containing guidelines that organizations should follow when making this kind of decision.