Information czar blasts Harper's accountability bill

[sanch]

Information czar blasts Harper's accountability bill
Gives bureaucrats new places to hide, says John Reid

James Gordon, CanWest News Service

Published: Saturday, April 29, 2006

OTTAWA -- Canada's information czar unleashed on Friday a scathing attack on proposed access to information reforms, calling them dangerous and disappointing.

"No previous government, since the Access to Information Act came into force in 1983, has put forward a more retrograde and dangerous set of proposals," Information Commissioner John Reid told Parliament Friday.

The bill would make it easier for the government to cover up wrongdoing, he wrote in an emergency report.

It also would make it easier for the government to shield itself from embarrassment and control the flow of information to Canadians, he added.

Under the Act, citizens can pay and request a variety of government records, including travel expenses, internal audits and briefings.

However, the law has been roundly criticized as out of date and too restrictive, as it gives bureaucrats vast powers to withhold and censor information.

Reid's rebuke comes just weeks after Prime Minister Stephen Harper released the omnibus federal accountability act, which included access reform proposals.

Although it would expand access provisions to cover seven Crown corporations -- including VIA Rail, Canada Post and the CBC -- it also suggests 10 new exemptions to block the release of information.

Eight of them contain no requirement for bureaucrats to demonstrate why records shouldn't be disclosed and contain no public interest overrides.

Reid pointed out there is currently only one such exemption (pertaining to cabinet documents) and "it has been consistently abused."

Draft internal reports and audits would also be shielded from scrutiny for 15 years and records relating to investigations of wrongdoing in government would be sealed forever.

In addition, recommendations Reid put forth in a draft bill last year to boost transparency weren't included in the accountability act. He had called for more oversight powers, better record-keeping by bureaucrats and a clamp-down on departments that don't fulfil their obligations, among other suggestions.

The Conservatives promised during the last election campaign to implement them all. Instead, the suggestions were shuffled off to a committee for more discussion. The government also released a "discussion paper" that raises concerns about Reid's proposals.

Treasury Board president John Baird, who is responsible for the Access to Information Act, called Reid's criticism excessive.

"I think the language is a little bit over the top," Baird told reporters outside the House of Commons Friday.

He dismissed 85 per cent of Reid's concerns as minor, adding he intends to work with the commissioner to address the others.

But NDP ethics critic Pat Martin suggested the report was "a serious setback" to the Tories, who have put accountability at the top of their legislative agenda.

"This is a pretty serious condemnation by one of the leading authorities on access to information," Martin said.

"It was the culture of secrecy that allowed corruption to flourish in Ottawa during the Liberal years," he added. "John Reid has actually now said we may be in a worse situation when it is finished."

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=b878e70c-8428-4c17-9744-8f4d25dee311&k=62076

 

[sanch]

So much for an open society and accountability in government.

 

[FiveParadox]

Re: Is C-2 Worth It?

Despite having only read about eighty sections of the Federal Accountability Act thus far, I would be in favour of its rejection by the House of Commons. The access to information provisions are backwards; I oppose measures to combine the offices of the Ethics Commissioner and the Senate Ethics Officer; some of the provisions seem to affect everyone except for the Government of Canada.

I think that this is very hasty legislation, and I hope that even if it is adopted by the Commons, that the Senate takes an appropriate time to study and research the effects of this legislation — even if it breaches the "timeline" proposed by the Government.

 

[sanch]

Here is the crux of John Reid's critique of Harper's accountability act. The main issue is that Harper has ignored the guidance of the Information Office, Judge Gomery’s report, the will of parliament, as well as abandoning a central campaign promise that Harper himself made ad nauseam to bring accountability to the Canadian government.


http://www.infocom.gc.ca/specialreports/2006special-e.asp#Proposed New Exemptions and Exclusions

It is regrettable that the new government did not consult with the Information Commissioner with respect to the need for, or the wording of, the 12 new exemptions to, and exclusions from, the right of access, which are included in the Federal Accountability Act. (The Commissioner offered to play a constructive role during the drafting, but his offer was refused.) It is, thus, unclear, how the government went about challenging the many requests it received for the lawful ability to keep secrets. The process it used favoured secrecy over openness.

The proposed new exemptions and exclusions infringe the principle that exceptions to the right of access should (1) be discretionary, (2) require a demonstration that a defined injury, harm or prejudice would probably result from disclosure, and (3) be subject to a public interest override. As well, the proposed addition of two new exclusions is intended to infringe the principle that exceptions to the right of access should be subject to independent review. It is the position of the government of Canada that the Information Commissioner may not examine information which the government claims to fall within an exclusion.

Where do these principles come from? First, they were articulated by the Information Commissioner as principles which guided the content of the Open Government Act. Second, these principles were articulated and endorsed by Justice Gomery in his second report Restoring Accountability. Third, these principles are endorsed in the Conservative Party’s election platform. Finally, these principles reflect the will of Parliament as expressed in the purpose section of the Access to Information Act, as follows:

"… that government information should be available to the public, that necessary exceptions to the right of access should be limited and specific and that decisions on the disclosure of government information should be reviewed independently of government."