Lee Harding
Politicians aren't fans of open government. In opposition perhaps, but not after taking the reigns. Stephen Harper famously ran on his accountability platform, but once in office exempted promised reforms to access to information laws. Similar tales can be told in many provinces. Even where good laws exist, governments can still erode transparency through generous interpretation of exemption clauses, moving slowly on requests, charging exorbitant fees, cutting funding to information offices, or by insisting a document doesn't exist.
In 2007 when the Canadian Taxpayers Federation released its list of the top 100 grants handed out by the federal government in 2006 there were only four Saskatchewan recipients: the RCMP Museum and the Onion Lake, Peter Ballantyne, and Lac La Ronge Indian Bands. This writer requested full documentation on dollars granted in each case.
The RCMP Museum received almost $20 million and had almost 1000 pages of documentation. By contrast, precious little could be found regarding the $112 million given to these reserves. Yes, there were broad budget numbers for education, housing, etc., but no indication of how these dollars were used, what results came about, or even if they went to their intended purpose.
The only morsel disclosed involved federal dollars for summer students working at Onion Lake. Here, six youth spent twelve weeks to develop a genealogical pamphlet and a history book with pictures. Whether their houses got built remains a mystery.
Incredibly, a letter followed explaining that to receive further information, one would have to be a member of the band in question. The fact that it involved tax dollars from every Canadian was - apparently - irrelevant.
On other occasions the wheels of open government turn s-l-o-w-l-y. On January 8, this writer requested information regarding a federal research project investigating gas emissions from cattle near Swift Current. The documents didn't arrive until five months later: June 23.
A further request asked for a brief description and dollar amount of all projects funded at that same research facility for the past five years. You can imagine this writer's disbelief after being told the request required 104 hours of research and a payment of $990.
Is there recourse when information is unjustly withheld or excessive fees are imposed? Yes. Information commissioners exist to intervene in such situations. A letter sent to the federal commissioner on April 18th decrying excessive fees received no answer for five months. The response sent September 12th read, "Although this office as a significant number of complaints to review, you can rest assured that an official from our office will contact you as soon as possible."
Don't blame commissioners. Governments frequently leave commissioner offices short-staffed and underfunded. Saskatchewan's information commissioner, Gary Dickson, has requested more help for years. His seven-person staff has a current backlog of 200 cases, a logjam likely to grow. By April next year, three of his staff will be on maternity leave and replaced with temp positions. The complexity of dealing with privacy and access cases ensures the new hires a steep learning curve and slower progress.
Governments tax almost half our incomes and control our lives in significant ways. It's not their information it's our information. Citizens should not have to beg on bended knee to see it unless a clear privacy or security consideration can be shown. National Right to Know Week is September 29 to October 3. Upholding and strengthening access laws is fundamental to personal freedom and government accountability. For more information, see [url=http://www.righttoknow.ca]http://www.righttoknow.ca[/url].
