Information & Ethics committee  We've reviewed the Access to Information Act. We've studied it. We've looked at it. I don't think we need another year to see how these changes go. To address the point that was raised earlier about efficiency, I think some of the changes here introduce new inefficiencies into t

Information & Ethics committee  I agree. I think what we need is a proactive disclosure regime that's meaningful. This is a lot about travel and hospitality, which some people care about, but a lot of people care about what's happening in our closed institutions, such as our prisons, or what's happening at the

Information & Ethics committee  Yes, and in doing that, shielded any possibility of accountability for the individuals involved.

Information & Ethics committee  As I said, this de novo review does really undercut that order-making power. It basically means that none of what the commissioner decides, none of what the commissioner looks at, is relevant to a court looking at it. The courts can look at brand new bases for refusal. They can l

Information & Ethics committee  I don't object in principle to that being a basis for refusal, but there needs to be criteria spelled out in the act as to how an institutional head decides what constitutes a frivolous, vexatious, or bad-faith request. We need to make sure there is a provision that says the basi

Information & Ethics committee  What I want to know is how you came to the determination that my request is frivolous, vexatious, or in bad faith. Bad faith, in particular, suggests that you know something about me that makes me put in a request when my genuine intent is not to get the information that I'm aski

Information & Ethics committee  I would say those kinds of criteria should be in the legislation, not just in a guidance document.

Information & Ethics committee  I haven't seen evidence that there's a need for a limitation, but I know that you've heard evidence that there's a need. Assuming that there is a need, I don't have a problem with it being in the legislation, but I think there need to be some criteria.

Information & Ethics committee  I think the reality is that if there's an order made by the Information Commissioner and the institution doesn't want to comply with it, that's exactly what they will do. They will seek review. It can be a very lengthy process, so while that review is pending, no information is g

Information & Ethics committee  Yes, there's a case that deals with that—

Information & Ethics committee  —question of delay. There is no reason to believe that the provisions won't be litigated—

Information & Ethics committee  I think the most significant thing would be to bring the ministers' offices and the Prime Minister's office into the access regime itself. The proactive disclosure and the proactive publication provisions don't accomplish what the access regime can accomplish. That would be a key

Information & Ethics committee  I'm not sure how it would work if the provision regarding judicial review to the court maintains that same language around de novo review. I don't know if having the commissioner's order certified by the court would do anything to that, if it would bring it into an ordinary appea

Information & Ethics committee  The problem is that I think it really guts the order-making power significantly, because it provides no incentive for government institutions to put forward their best case. If the decision is to refuse access, they can put forward.... You have to remember there are journalists w

Information & Ethics committee  Yes. This is the last point. On the proactive disclosure piece, this is not a substitute for a strong access regime. The proactive publication regime established by the act lets the government decide what Canadians can see and applies primarily to financial information. Canadian