(For publication)

The State of Freedom of Information

By Marian Scott Toronto, Sept. 22, 2011 How much did the director of your local hospital spend on expense-account meals? Are workers paid by your tax dollars allowed to log onto Facebook and Twitter at the office? What are the details of a major bridge-repair contract awarded to a private company? Under freedom-of-information laws, citizens have a right to know these things. But in many cases, governments are still blocking their efforts to find out, according to the National Freedom of Information Audit. The acts are supposed to encourage accountability, said Fred Vallance-Jones, an assistant professor of journalism at the University of Kings College in Halifax who authored the annual report card on FOI in Canada. But if the requesters cant get the information in a reasonable amount of time, then to me, the acts arent performing their primary role, Vallance-Jones said. The annual audit, funded by Newspapers Canada, is the largest and most comprehensive survey of how effectively Canadas FOI laws are working. The 53-page report gives Charlottetown, Saskatoon and Manitoba top marks for responding to requests quickly and fully, while handing failing grades to Winnipeg, Saint John, N.B. and the province of Quebec for holding back certain information. Researchers supervised by Vallance-Jones filed 354 information requests on 40 topics at the end of December 2010. At the end of five months, all requests that still had not produced a decision were deemed to have been refused. The requests were sent to 11 federal departments and agencies, 53 provincial and territorial departments, 39 municipalities and 10 large hospitals across the country. Seventy-three per cent of government offices responded within 30 days the limit set by most federal, provincial and municipal access-to-information laws. One-quarter of government offices responded between 30 and 60 days after getting the request, while 2.5 per cent of requests still had not produced results by the end of the audit. This years results show that the system works better in theory than it has in practice, the report said. Attempts to access records to hold governments accountable become

bogged down in long delays, demands for prohibitive fees and bureaucratic intransigence, it found. Only 61 per cent of federal departments and agencies responded within 30 days earning the federal government a D for speed of disclosure. Still, that was an improvement compared to last year, when only half of federal offices met the 30-day deadline. Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Yukon and Quebec answered the fastest; all four earned an A for speed. British Columbia was slowest rated an F for answering only 13 per cent of queries within 30 days. The report noted the main reason B.C. took the longest to answer is that its access-to-information law only requires a response within 30 business days, while the deadline is 30 calendar days in most jurisdictions. The audit also examined whether governments answered fully or held certain facts back. Information requested included guidelines on personal or business use of social media sites; copies of contracts awarded by federal departments or municipalities; communications budgets for provincial departments and municipalities; briefing notes for provincial ministers; costs of medical treatments in the United States later reimbursed by provincial health insurance; and credit card statements for senior hospital employees. The most forthcoming provinces were Manitoba and Nova Scotia, which both earned an A for disclosure. The most secretive was Quebec rated an F for refusing to disclose certain information. For example, Quebec refused to reveal travel costs for senior officials. Ontario was the next most uncooperative province, receiving a D for disclosure. Municipalities that scored highest for disclosure were Regina, Saskatoon, Montreal, Sherbrooke, Quebec City and Charlottetown. The least forthcoming city was Winnipeg, which refused to release a street-sweeping contract, claiming it was confidential. Saint John, N.B., refused to provide its policy on use of social media sites on the grounds that the city was not yet covered by the provinces new Right to Information and Protection of Privacy Act. However, Charlottetown, Moncton and Fredericton complied with information requests despite not yet being subject to access-to-information legislation. Fees are another deterrent to obtaining government information, the audit found. Saskatchewans Ministry of Social Services demanded a whopping $1,685.25 for staff time and photocopies when asked to supply the deputy ministers credit card statements. Cornwall, Ontario, asked for $461.74 to cover administrative fees and photocopies to supply a contract for construction of a $23-million sports centre. The fee estimate

included sales tax, even though FOI fees are not subject to tax, and staff time for making photocopies, which is also contrary to Ontarios FOI law. Researchers requested copies of more than 50 government contracts for everything from dental equipment for the armed forces to private mail delivery for Canada Post. The request tests one of the most important principles of Canadian democracy, that the public has a right to know how public officials are spending money and with whom they are spending, the report said. It recommended that governments notify companies with which they do business that contracts are public information under access-to-information laws. Vallance-Jones said the results suggest that government offices tend to answer FOI requests more quickly when they dont involve controversial topics or come from reporters. But if these acts dont work where the rubber really hits the road, with requests from media, requests from interest groups and lobby groups, requests from parliamentarians and opposition members, then the acts arent doing what theyre supposed to do, he said. Despite a refreshing openness about municipal contracts in Saskatchewan and Charlottetowns continued willingness to release information even though it is not covered by access legislation, the report concluded, there is still a lot to be done to make Canadas access statutes work as citizens have a right to expect.