Friday, November 12, 2004

OTTAWA - Today, as federal Justice Minister Irwin Cotler considers how to respond to opposition demands to strengthen the federal Access to Information Act (ATI Act) and system, Democracy Watch called on all federal political parties to ensure reforms are meaningful and are passed before the next election.

"The past two decades have proven that the federal Information Commissioner is mostly bark, with little bite," said Duff Conacher, Coordinator of Democracy Watch.  "The Commissioner will never be able to counter the undemocratic culture of federal government secrecy until he has powers to order the creation, maintenance and detailed disclosure of the records of all activities of all government institutions, and to penalize anyone who breaks the rules."

Democracy Watch, and many other citizen groups, believe the following measures must be included in any reform initiative to ensure an access-to-information system that effectively requires transparency:

1. any type of record created by any entity that receives significant funding from or is connected to the federal government, or was created by the federal government and fulfills public interest functions, should be automatically covered by the Access to Information Act (as in the United Kingdom);
2. all exemptions under the ATI Act should be discretionary, and limited by a proof of harm test and a public interest override (as in B.C. and Alberta);
3. the ATI Act should require every entity covered by the Act (as in the United Kingdom, U.S., Australia and New Zealand): to create detailed records for all decisions and actions; to routinely disclose records that are required to be disclosed; to assign responsibility to individuals for the creation and maintenance of each record, and; to maintain each record so that it remains easily accessible;
4. severe penalties should be created for not creating records, for not maintaining records properly, and for unjustifiable delays in responses to requests;
5. the Information Commissioner should be given explicit powers under the ATI Act: to order the release of a record (as in the United Kingdom, Ontario, B.C. and Quebec); to penalize violators of the law, and; to require systemic changes in government departments to improve compliance (as in the United Kingdom)
6. funding to the access to information system and enforcement should be increased to solve backlog problems instead of increasing administrative barriers such as limiting requests in any way, and fees for access should be lower overall and standardized for every entity covered the ATI Act; and
7. Parliament must be required to review the ATI Act every 5 years.