Information & Ethics committee  Yes. Bill C-58 ignored this committee's unanimous June 2016 report. It ignored all the other stakeholders. The information commissioners have documented in their annual reports very clearly that things are worse than they have been in the past. I challenge you, as committee me

Information & Ethics committee  This claim has often been made, but I think it's that you're unable to speak truth to power and have frank discussions when you're doing it in secret, because then the government can always deny what has been recommended from the public service and there's no record of it, so the

Information & Ethics committee  I could say the same thing about any of the exemptions. They're all, unfortunately, too broad. They all need to be narrowed. Section 20 is one of the most regularly abused. That's our general recommendation. There can be a specific discussion about how to narrow any particular ex

Information & Ethics committee  I assume you're asking me again.

Information & Ethics committee  Please forgive me, I should have practised my French more, but I have to answer you in English. Yes, there is a culture of secrecy. The act is called the Access to Information Act, but it really should be called the “guide to keeping information from the public that they have a

Information & Ethics committee  Yes, and like all exceptions, it's too broad. There cannot be exclusions at all. There has to be a proof of harm if disclosure happens, and also a public interest override, with the commissioner able to examine all documents. In the whole area of contracts, the area of commercia

Information & Ethics committee  Government secrecy is a recipe for corruption, waste, abuse of the public, and decisions that protect private interests and violate the public interest. “Sunlight is a good disinfectant”, as a wise U.S. Supreme Court justice said about a century ago. The secrecy that is allowed

Information & Ethics committee  Well, the exclusions and the loopholes define the rights to access, and so you're right. The Access to Information Act is actually more loophole than it is rules in providing access. The purpose in subsection 2(b) “is to enhance the accountability and transparency of federal inst

Information & Ethics committee  The more the scandalous behaviour happens, whether it's dishonesty, unethical behaviour, secretive behaviour or waste, the more it becomes routine and the less it becomes news and the more accepted it becomes, as Mr. Cutler was highlighting. That leads to decline. That's why we n

Information & Ethics committee  The provincial laws are generally based on the federal law, which happens a lot in Canada if the feds pass a law. The same thing has happened with the lobbying law and with some of the ethics rules. The provinces essentially copy it. We see the same loopholes across the country

Information & Ethics committee  That's very difficult to summarize generally, because there are multiple institutions and it's changing year to year. For example, soon after the Federal Accountability Act was passed, the Canadian government extended the law to 15 more public federal institutions, and there w

Information & Ethics committee  Thank you to the committee for the opportunity to address you today on this very important topic with regard to some of the key rules amongst other key rules that protect our democracy and government integrity at the federal level. I'm representing today a coalition of 27 citize

Information & Ethics committee  I will make one last statement. If you do not reject the commissioner's unethical proposed new rules or remain silent, you will essentially be supporting corrupt political decision-making. As I'm testifying this afternoon on Valentine's Day, I will end by appealing to you to s

Information & Ethics committee  Well, you couldn't go much lower. Several surveys in the past several years have shown that only 10% to 20% of Canadians trust politicians. They believe that you are trying to protect elites and yourselves and don't address their concerns. This move is essentially saying that we

Information & Ethics committee  All donations imply accountability.... I'm sorry, but I'm listening to the translation, and that didn't really make sense to me. Is it that donations imply accountability or donations imply unethical influence?