ߣÄÌÉçÇø

OTTAWA — A pro-transparency group is telling MPs to retool the Access to Information Act by dropping the application fee, imposing tighter timelines to respond to requests for files and narrowing exceptions to the law. 

The changes are among 18 measures outlined by the group Democracy Watch in a submission to the House of Commons committee on information, privacy and ethics. 

The federal access law allows people who pay $5 to ask for documents — from internal emails and expense claims to briefing memos and research reports — but it has long been criticized as outdated and poorly administered. 

Federal agencies are supposed to respond within 30 days or provide valid reasons why more time is needed to process a request. 

The law has not been significantly updated since its introduction almost 40 years ago, and many users complain of lengthy delays, heavily blacked-out documents or full denials in response to their applications. 

Democracy Watch says legislative reforms should be introduced as soon as possible, noting citizen groups and experts have called for decades for key changes to close loopholes in the law and strengthen enforcement.

The group's co-founder, Duff Conacher, said in a news release that the Trudeau Liberals, and all federal parties, must stop their "spin, lame excuses and unjustifiable delays" and make the revisions voters want to ensure federal institutions — and those that receive money from the government — are transparent and accountable.

Conacher told the Commons committee during a hearing Wednesday that the federal access law is so problematic it really is just a guide to keeping information secret that the public has a right to know.

Government secrecy is a recipe for corruption, waste, and decisions that protect private interests and violate the public interest, he added. "And sunshine is a good disinfectant, as a wise U.S. Supreme Court justice said about a century ago."

Researcher Ken Rubin, a veteran user of the access law, reeled off a list of episodes in which the law resulted in information on everything from naval ships to residential schools being shielded from release. 

Rubin noted there is general agreement that the access system is broken. 

"Well, in whose interest is broken? It's in the vested interests of the government officials who want that secrecy and who want to continue with that secrecy."

Democracy Watch says the law should be changed to require public institutions to respond to access requests "as soon as possible." An extension of the 30-day initial time limit for responding should require the permission of the information commissioner, an ombudsman for users, and be limited to a maximum of an additional 60 days.

The group also says exceptions to the right of access should be clearly and narrowly defined and limited to areas in which secrecy is required in the public interest.

All exceptions should be strictly limited by a "proof of harm test," augmented by a public interest override to prevent undue secrecy, Democracy Watch adds.

Allan Cutler, former president of Canadians for Accountability, agreed there is a federal culture of secrecy, likening the system to a closed door to which government officials hold the key.

"You can change the law, but you also have to change the culture," he told the MPs. "And you need the people at the top, which is the politicians of all parties, (to) say, 'This is what it will be.' And then the bureaucracy will conform."

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 26, 2022.

Jim Bronskill, The Canadian Press