Overhaul needed for to stop erosion of Access to Information Act, watchdog says

Federal information watchdog releases 85 recommendations to dramatically overhaul Canada’s “eroding” access to information regime.


Thestar.com
March 31, 2015
By Alex Boutilier

Canada’s outdated access to information system has been transformed into a “shield against transparency,” according to the federal information watchdog, who is calling for urgent reform to open up government for Canadians.

In a special report advocating a complete overhaul of the system, Information Commissioner Suzanne Legault on Tuesday warned against the continued “erosion” of Canada’s Access to Information Act.

“Instead of the act really promoting and moving the government forward in a culture of openness, it has seemed to have moved us forward in a culture of secrecy,” Legault told reporters.

“It is time to have a real, comprehensive review of all of these exemptions (to disclosure), to see whether or not these exemptions are way too broad and actually act as a shield against disclosure.”

Treasury Board President Tony Clement, whose ministry is responsible for the administration of the system, thanked the commissioner for her report and said the government will consider it.

In an interview with the Star in December Clement acknowledged that the Access to Information Act, which has not been substantially changed in three decades, does need to be reviewed. But Clement said the government had run out of time before the 2015 election to accomplish that review.

Legault’s office prepared a comprehensive reform plan of 85 recommendations, the majority grouped around five categories: expanding coverage, reducing delays, maximizing disclosure, strengthening her office’s powers, and the introduction of criminal and administrative penalties.

The recommendations would add Parliament and the Prime Minister’s Office to the institutions subject to the act, streamline the system of exempt information, and limit delays in processing requests to a maximum of 60 days. They would also create a series of criminal and administrative penalties for obstructing the system, destroying records, or failing to report substantive discussions.