Information & Ethics committee  The last time we received an increase was in 2020, and it was with respect to amendments to the act. Anything we get, we invest in our investigators. The number of complaints we receive is increasing every year, so we put that money into more people, to investigate faster and to eliminate our inventory as quickly as possible.

Information & Ethics committee  I haven't had an increase in the last three or four years. I requested $2 million per year for three years in the last budget request for temporary funding, and that was not provided.

Information & Ethics committee  What you need to understand is that I already ordered National Defence to respond to a request and they said they would comply with the order. Under the act, you either comply or you go to court. In this case, they said they would comply but they didn't. They missed the date, so that's why I'm in court, to force them to respect an order that has already been issued.

Information & Ethics committee  It was six with the referral of the investigation to the Attorney General, but four applications of mandamus: three against DND and one against TMC.

Information & Ethics committee  There were four applications of mandamus produced. The first one was against the Trans Mountain Corporation, TMC. That application was settled. Then, I had to apply for a mandamus against National Defence three times. One has also been found to be moot, because the request was responded to, but we still have two active applications with the Department of National Defence.

Information & Ethics committee  Yes.

Information & Ethics committee  That's the fear that we have in my office right now. We hope that it's not going to become a norm.

Information & Ethics committee  Whether it's the culture or a lack of resources, the priority at National Defence definitely has not been to provide access to the appropriate resources to respond to these requests.

Information & Ethics committee  Generally speaking, I agree with you that many institutions react first by redacting documents instead of trying to give the most information possible through access to information. The Access to Information Act includes exceptions and they must be applied correctly. We often note that these exemptions are discretionary in nature.

Information & Ethics committee  It’s very difficult to say. Every institution is different and applies different sections, but I think it’s often provoked by the fear of giving too much information, information that won’t be well understood. This culture currently exists within government, and we have to change it.

Information & Ethics committee  This culture has always existed. When the legislation passed, its goal was to grant access to information by limiting exceptions. However, I think the way people applied that legislation since then led to the opposite effect. We see exceptions being the norm instead of granting access to information.

Information & Ethics committee  I can’t speak to that specific case. That said, you’re flagging something that is problematic. Now that we know the result and the time it took to disclose the document, people are no longer convinced that documents are revised appropriately. That is why many complainants tell us they doubt the exceptions and exclusions are applied appropriately.

Information & Ethics committee  That's within the authority of the Treasury Board Secretariat, because they are responsible for administering the act. I often provide some examples of solutions that could be explored.

Information & Ethics committee  No, we don't.

Information & Ethics committee  Doing that is not within my mandate. Through investigations, complaints and dealings with institutions, sometimes we come up with best practices. During meetings with other institutions, I often refer them to these institutions that have good practices, but that is really within the purview of the President of Treasury Board Secretariat.