Government Operations Committee on Feb. 17th, 2021

[The Chair (Mr. Robert Kitchen (Souris—Moose Mountain, CPC)), Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

I call the meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 17 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates. The committee is meeting today from 5:56 p.m. to 7:56 p.m., but if all goes well, maybe earlier. We will hear from the Information Commissioner as part of the committee's study on the government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Today's meeting is also taking place in the new webinar format. Webinars are for public committee meetings and are available only to members, their staff and witnesses. Members may have noticed that entry into the meeting was much quicker than what it has been in the past and that they immediately entered as an active participant. All functionalities for active participants remain the same. Staff will be non-active participants only and therefore can only view the meeting in gallery view.

I would like to take this opportunity to remind all participants in this meeting that taking screenshots or photos of your screen is not permitted.

To ensure an orderly meeting, I would like to outline a few rules to follow.

Interpretation of this video conference will work much as it does in a regular committee meeting. You have the choice, at the bottom of your screen, of “floor”, “English” or “French”. Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. When you are ready to speak, you can click on the microphone icon to activate your mike. When you are not speaking, your mike should be on mute.

To raise a point of order during the meeting, committee members should ensure their microphone is unmuted and state “point of order” to get the chair's attention.

In order to ensure social distancing in the committee room, if you need to speak privately with the clerk or analysts during the meeting, please email them at the committee email address.

For those people who are participating in the committee room, please note that masks are required unless you are seated and when physical distancing is not possible.

I will now invite the Information Commissioner to make her opening statement.

[Caroline Maynard, Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada]

Thank you. I will be brief.

Thank you for inviting me to meet with you once again to discuss access to information during the COVID pandemic.

In my previous appearance before this committee, I conveyed the message I have consistently reiterated since April of last year. The right of access, a quasi-constitutional right, cannot be suspended because of the pandemic.

Government transparency is the foundation of a strong democracy and has never been more important than during this crisis. In other words, we must collectively strive to produce an access to information system in which access requests are processed in a timely manner without interruption, decisions are properly documented, and information is well managed.

At our last meeting, I highlighted some of the factors that can create barriers to transparency and undermine the government's accountability to Canadians.

I also indicated that this is an opportune time to make essential changes, starting with the business model of government and the culture that underpins it.

It was time for the government to show leadership and take action.

We now find ourselves approaching one year since the start of the pandemic. Has the government seized the opportunity to change? In my estimation, it has not, at least not to the extent I would have hoped and Canadians might have expected.

Nevertheless, some encouraging progress has been made since we last met. Indeed, over the summer, many institutions have regained some degree of capacity to deal with access to information requests.

I would like to take this opportunity to salute the outstanding efforts of employees in federal institutions who have worked diligently to restore access to information operations and respond to Canadians. I congratulate them for their creativity and initiative, which enabled them to make the most of a difficult situation.

In contrast, there are other signs that the direction taken by the government is not the right one and that few or no concrete measures have been adopted to improve the current situation. The fact that the launch of a new online access to information system has been delayed by one year is one example.

I was also disappointed by the news that a report on the review of the access to information regime, announced by Minister Duclos, would be submitted only next January. On February 3, during a conversation I had with Mr. Duclos, I took the opportunity to remind him that the principles of openness and reasonable timeliness must be respected. I also pointed out, as I have done more than once, that there were, and continue to be, concrete steps that can be taken immediately and that do not require any legislative change.

I have now also reached out to other ministers who oversee what I call our 15 top institutions. I asked them to speak with them about the state of access within their own institutions and to discuss how, as leaders, they must be part of the solution.

In a submission I shared with Minister Duclos and published on my website last January, I outlined some of the steps I believe could make an immediate difference. They include steps to address the following four issues: inadequate leadership and a lack of clear guidelines on transparency and disclosure expectations; a pressing need to innovate and to allocate enough resources to the access regime; the necessity to properly document decisions and to efficiently manage institutions' information; and the declassification of records in a timely manner.

In conclusion, let me reiterate what I have been saying for a long time: it is imperative that the government act without delay.

I will gladly answer your questions now.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you very much for your presentation.

We will now start our rounds of questions. I would suggest that due to the time today, because of the voting, we will go through the first three rounds and we won't do the fourth round.

We will start the first round with Mr. Paul-Hus.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, Ms. Maynard. Thank you for being with us today.

I greatly appreciate your honesty and transparency, as well as the way you do your job. It allows us to confirm things that have been bothering us for some time, namely the obvious lack of transparency on the part of the government.

What is also worrying is that you say in your report that the access to information system is on the brink of the abyss. It is so badly flawed that in order to get a minimum of information, the opposition is forced to take extraordinary measures, such as bringing motions to the House.

You say the system is beyond repair. What do you mean by that? I would like you to give me some concrete examples related to the management of COVID-19.

[Caroline Maynard]

I said that the system was on the verge of being irreparable. Of course, there are steps that can be taken.

COVID-19 demonstrated that our system was archaic. The access to information system still relies heavily on software that has not been updated for a long time and on bureaucratic processes. At the beginning of the pandemic, when people started working from home, they didn't have access to the systems that would allow them to respond to access to information requests. So they had to start really questioning how information was being managed, what systems it was stored in, how they could share it with each other, and then how it could be disclosed to Canadians.

We realized that there were a lot of institutions whose system was not up to standard. We are slowly seeing an improvement, but there are still institutions that tell us that employees have to work evenings, nights or weekends, otherwise the computer system is not fast enough for the quantity of documents to be processed.

In addition, many people told us that records managers—those who create records in programs—often refuse to come back to the office to get the records that would allow them to respond to an access to information request. Since people have been unable to get to the office or working from home, it has been very difficult to get access to documents.

We wonder why there are still so many files in paper format and why they are not being scanned. We also need to figure out how to transfer documents to Canadians without going through the post office.

There are all kinds of situations like these that persist and that the pandemic has made much worse.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

All right, thank you.

Precisely because we are talking about personnel, you emphasize in your report a “critical need of additional qualified staff.” Have you assessed this situation in each department affected by COVID-19, such as Health Canada, Public Services and Procurement Canada, the Public Health Agency of Canada and Public Safety Canada? Do you have accurate figures on hand?

[Caroline Maynard]

No, I don't. I would tell you that all organizations lack qualified staff.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

You also say that “the Offices of the Prime Minister and Ministers should also be subject to the Act” and that “the records they hold should be accessible to the public, with the exception of those of a personal or political nature.”

From what you say, the minutes, for example of the COVID-19 Vaccine Task Force, the key dates of negotiations of the various contracts and even the documents related to the vaccine purchase contracts should be made public. Is this correct?

[Caroline Maynard]

What I am saying is that many documents are not accessible because they are held by ministers' offices and ministers are not currently subject to the act. The only records they must make available are those already listed in Part 2 of the Access to Information Act, which deals with the proactive release of information. These are often documents that were already proactively disclosed in the past.

Now we see that there is a lot of correspondence between public servants and employees in ministers' offices. However, all of this is protected by cabinet confidence or is part of the documents held by ministers' offices.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Are the discussions of the COVID-19 Vaccine Task Force also protected?

[Caroline Maynard]

I don't have any particular information on this group. I am sorry.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

In addition, you say that “the culture of complacency and the downplaying or tolerance of delays must end.”

Was that well received by the President of the Treasury Board, Mr. Duclos? Does he understand the problem that currently exists within the organizations?

[Caroline Maynard]

During our conversation, he assured me that he understood very well that this was a serious problem. Of course, we are still waiting for the government to act.

As I mentioned earlier, a project was to be put in place to make the processing of access to information requests much easier: a new online system where Canadians could have received information directly, instead of using all kinds of other means. However, that project has been put on hold for another year, which is disappointing.

The ministers are aware of this, but they must show us with clear and concrete actions that they are serious and that they want to change the situation.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you, Mr. Paul-Hus.

Now we'll go to Mr. Drouin for six minutes.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank Ms. Maynard for staying with us much longer than expected.

I have some questions about the increased number of requests.

In 2018-2019, there were a total of 125,060 access to information requests. In 2019-2020, there were 149,570. In your report, Ms. Maynard, you indicate that in 2018-2019, 73.1% of requests were responded to within the prescribed time frame. In 2019-2020, that figure dropped to 67.4%.

Do you attribute this decrease of 5.7 percentage points to COVID-19?

Have you had discussions with government departments to find out why they have not processed all requests on time, other than the increase in the number of requests?

[Caroline Maynard]

In fact, the statistics you are referring to are one year old. We do not yet have the statistics for 2020-2021. That said, COVID-19 will undoubtedly have had an even greater impact on the processing of access to information requests.

The biggest problem is that the number of access to information requests continues to increase by approximately 25% per year, while the resources allocated to processing these requests are not increasing in the same proportion. This is, of course, problematic.

Moreover, when I talk about resources, I am not only talking about money. It's also about finding people who are well trained and who want to work in this field. It's not an easy job. Organizations have a very hard time finding people who want to come and work for them. Some even steal analysts from each other.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Yes, I can imagine.

Do you analyze the nature of requests?

I, for one, had to wait almost two years before I received a response to an access to information request I had made. That was 11 years ago. Lawyers had to intervene in the file to see if there were any legal issues.

Do you know a little bit about the nature of the requests? Do you know why the number of requests increases by 25% from year to year?

[Caroline Maynard]

In Canada, there is now a culture that makes people really want to know on what basis the government makes its decisions and where their money goes.

In Canada, 65% of access to information requests come from the public. We often think of journalists, who are certainly important clients. There are also many historians and professors. On the other hand, the average person now asks a lot of questions. For example, people want to know what the policies are, how decisions are made, and where the money has been sent. This is one of the reasons why the number of requests will always increase. Canadians know they have a right to access information and they are asking for it.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

You have discussed the issue with Minister Duclos. On the one hand, the number of requests is increasing. On the other hand, you said it was difficult to recruit staff and that this was a problem.

You also mentioned that the systems were archaic and that the implementation of a new computer system was planned.

In your opinion, once the new online system is in place, will this reduce response time and allow the institutions to meet the deadlines, or is this something that remains to be seen?

[Caroline Maynard]

Even if today's system is improved, it will never be able to meet the demand. The government needs to show leadership by doing voluntary disclosure, because that is where the problem lies. I'm not talking about proactive disclosure; that's a different thing. People should have access to information that is in the public interest, especially when it comes to important issues such as COVID-19, health or the environment. If this information were available without having to request it, it would reduce the number of access to information requests. It would be a step forward.

Of course, better systems will certainly help to improve the situation, but there will never be enough human resources to meet the demand.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Regardless of the computer system, access to information requests that require legal analysis will always take some time because of the required checks.

[Caroline Maynard]

Of course, institutions must determine whether the requested information is protected. Usually, lawyers can easily determine whether information about litigation or legal opinions is protected. It is not these cases that pose a risk, but rather discretionary exemptions or exclusions. Where people have a discretionary exclusionary power, they will rarely decide to disclose the information. Rather, they will attempt to redact the information for fear that it may be misinterpreted or cause embarrassment. It is these cases that require the most interaction between analysts and institutions.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

There is also consultation with third parties who—

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you very much.