Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 1-15 of 22
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Information & Ethics committee  Perhaps, Mr. Chair, I could simply say thank you very much. I respect enormously the undertaking you have before you. I think it's terrific you're taking on this challenge. As someone who's been an observer of this for a long time, I'm just so delighted with your initiative. Thank you for the opportunity to participate.

March 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Murray Rankin

Information & Ethics committee  Thank you for your comments. I agree with you entirely about political will. It's a matter of great sadness that Canada has not been able to rise to the occasion for over 25 years. I commend the current government for the Federal Accountability Act and the extension of the law to a number of additional agencies.

March 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Murray Rankin

Information & Ethics committee  Thank you. The issue is rather straightforward. If the government chooses to outsource certain functions that in the past have been government functions, does the law continue to apply? That's the threshold question that is being addressed. Commissioner Loukidelis addressed that issue, raising concerns about it to a committee that studied the B.C. legislation, and the government now routinely confirms in contracts that public bodies and their contractors, when they produce records, are subject and continue to be subject to the legislation.

March 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Murray Rankin

Information & Ethics committee  I'm not sure whether that's directed to Mr. Tromp, but may I just—

March 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Murray Rankin

Information & Ethics committee  Thank you for your question. Of course many lawyers, as you point out, use the legislation as a discovery tool. They may get a certain amount of information from traditional civil litigation rules involving document discovery or examination for discovery, but often when the government is a party, getting information from the relevant agencies is critical to the case.

March 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Murray Rankin

Information & Ethics committee  Thank you. As you suggested at the outset, I won't speak to the particular case to which you alluded. I must say that I find disturbing any use of crown copyright to thwart rights that are provided to citizens of Canada under the Access to Information Act or its provincial equivalents.

March 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Murray Rankin

Information & Ethics committee  It's not a mere declaration but what is called an executive order, and therefore it's binding on the U.S. administration. It's a formal EO that was issued by the President of the United States; it therefore has an effect on the way in which executive discretion is exercised by the agencies to which the act is subject.

March 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Murray Rankin

Information & Ethics committee  Ms. Block, maybe I could just add to that answer. The Federal Accountability Act was indeed the largest reform to the law since its inception. One of the things it did was expand the coverage, as Mr. Tromp has noted, to other crown corporations. There are many that are still not covered by the act.

March 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Murray Rankin

Information & Ethics committee  I see no need for the kinds of restrictions that you might contemplate--timelines or the like. To me, it's critical that an independent officer have the ability to reassure applicants and Canadians at large that they have reviewed the records. I'm not for a moment suggesting when I say this that the records ought to be disclosed.

March 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Murray Rankin

Information & Ethics committee  On your second question, concerning routine disclosure, Mr. Siksay, it's a classic example of how we are not using the technology that has emerged since the act was passed many years ago. If two or three people ask for the same record and the government has chosen to disclose it, perhaps severing certain things along the way, why on earth can't that be put on the Internet for all to see?

March 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Murray Rankin

Information & Ethics committee  I heard the question very clearly. If I may, I can proceed to answer. Mr. Siksay, this is a hobby horse of mine, I must confess, so I welcome the question a great deal. To me, a statute that does not have full order-making power is a bird with one wing, and a crippled bird at that.

March 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Murray Rankin

Information & Ethics committee  I would agree with what Commissioner Loukidelis has said, Ms. Simson. From my perspective, it seems difficult to believe that this could be the source of terrorism or abuse of that kind. It's been common in many parts of the United States that access is allowed electronically. It's difficult to believe, therefore, that Canada couldn't rise to the occasion.

March 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Murray Rankin

Information & Ethics committee  Maybe I can start, Mrs. Simson. I believe I'm right in thinking that only the Canadian Access to Information Act has an exclusion. Perhaps I should explain why it matters. No one for a moment is suggesting that a cabinet exemption is not appropriate. Indeed, all statutes that I know of have such an exemption.

March 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Murray Rankin

Information & Ethics committee  I will say that if questions are posed in French, I will do my best to answer them in that language. Let me just say this. I have in my hand a document that was prepared in 1987 by a committee very much like yours. I was proud to have been one of the research directors on the Open and Shut report, as it was called in 1987.

March 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Murray Rankin

Information & Ethics committee  ... to the House of Commons committee that prepared a report entitled—

March 11th, 2009Committee meeting

Murray Rankin