Evidence of meeting #65 for Public Accounts in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was gauvin.
A recording is available from Parliament.
June 11th, 2007 / 4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Jean-Yves Roy Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Estabrooks, it is not quite accurate to say that we met with the Access to Information Commissioner. In fact, he intervened several times to have the file released. I hope you got that.
4:55 p.m.
As an Individual
Could you repeat that? I'm sorry. I was looking for the voice.
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Jean-Yves Roy Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
The Access to Information Commissioner told us, at a committee other than the Committee on Access to Information, that he did indeed intervene several times—his office, not necessarily himself—to finally release the documents.
My question concerns the delays. Mr. Alberti, I do not want to make a judgment and I do not want an answer from you, but rather from Mr. Lavoie. You did say, however, that you preferred not to discuss the delays, because you are bound by client-solicitor privilege, and your client was the RCMP, which was represented by Mr. Lavoie.
Is that really what you said?
4:55 p.m.
Legal Services, Department of Justice, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Your interpretation is incorrect. I said that cases are processed on two levels within legal services. You have to distinguish between the process and what I would call the substance. The processing of a file, its content and the legal opinions I give are protected by solicitor-client privilege.
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Jean-Yves Roy Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
I'm sorry, but let me stop you there. You answered my question. What is protected is the legal opinion you give your client.
4:55 p.m.
Legal Services, Department of Justice, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Normally, the issues involved in a legal opinion are also protected. I wanted to draw the attention of the committee to the fact that I have no control over the annotations made by a client on the activity report. That's not part of my work. The client can make any type of annotation on the document. Further, it may have been the analyst, and perhaps ultimately the client himself. The client did not ask for me the opinion.
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Jean-Yves Roy Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Thank you.
Mr. Lavoie, I would like to ask you a question. It is a question you can answer. Did you ask your legal advisor to delay his legal opinion in any way possible?
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Jean-Yves Roy Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Then tell me why you asked for a second opinion.
4:55 p.m.
Superintendent (Retired), Royal Canadian Mounted Police
I did not ask for a second opinion. The report came in on March 21, and on March 22, by boss, Mr. Corrigan, got the report and sent it back for a second legal opinion.
5 p.m.
Bloc
Jean-Yves Roy Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
So your boss picked up the report only to send it back a second time for a legal opinion, knowing full well that it could take another four or five months. Did you think this was normal?
5 p.m.
Superintendent (Retired), Royal Canadian Mounted Police
You cannot presume that it would have taken another four or five months, because I released the report three weeks later.
5 p.m.
Bloc
Jean-Yves Roy Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Fine. But why did your boss ask for a second legal opinion? Was he not satisfied with the first one? What was the problem?
5 p.m.
Superintendent (Retired), Royal Canadian Mounted Police
You are all aware of the note Mr. Gauvin sent us, which indicated that the file contained personal information which should not be disclosed. I do not want to put words into my boss' mouth, but I presume he wanted an opinion on these new facts.
5 p.m.
Bloc
Jean-Yves Roy Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Would you like to add something, Mr. Alberti?
5 p.m.
Legal Services, Department of Justice, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Yes. I don't agree with your premise, which is that in asking for a second opinion, there would be another five-month delay. When a second opinion was requested, I believe that it was clear to the client that efforts were being made to get the information out.
I had to put a lot of other work aside, and I had to work on the file over the weekend, and I basically ended up doing the work of an analyst, going over every word and every line, which is not the work I usually do. But it was done.
5 p.m.
Bloc
Jean-Yves Roy Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
I still have doubts. It surprises me. You are familiar with the Access to Information Act.
5 p.m.
Bloc
Jean-Yves Roy Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
You know that the act sets out deadlines. You know that four or five months is a very long time. Did you tell your client that the process was taking a long time? You work with the act, you must respect it. Of course, the act is not binding. I understand that. Nevertheless, it sets out deadlines.
Did you warn your client that the deadlines had already been exceeded, and that after four months, the Information Commissioner might start to ask questions? It was your responsibility to tell your client that it was taking too much time.
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Brian Fitzpatrick
Mr. Roy, that's your last question.
We'll hear from Mr. Alberti.
5 p.m.
Bloc
Jean-Yves Roy Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
I would like you to answer, Mr. Alberti.
5 p.m.
Legal Services, Department of Justice, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
I think that you are trying to find out what the nature of my relationship with my client was, especially as far as this case is concerned. I know that you find it a little strange that I am not disclosing our conversations, our discussions, but I can tell you, generally speaking, that there were exchanges with the client on this file, that the client expressed his concerns and that I said I wanted to move the file forward.
5 p.m.
Superintendent (Retired), Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Yes, sir, when I first testified last week, I gave an information sheet showing that 80% of all access to information requests were provided out of time. In fact, we were getting so many requests that we could not even request extensions beyond the 30 days. So we have to keep all of that in perspective. This file was no different from the hundreds of files that were also in the “deemed refusal” position.
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Brian Fitzpatrick
Thank you, Mr. Lavoie, for that clarification.
We have five minutes for Mr. Sweet.