• Print
  • Send to a friend
  • Comment (9)
  •  

Access to information changes are bad: Parsons

Published on June 23, 2012
Published on June 23, 2012
Topics :
Office of the Information , Supreme Court , CBC , Canada

By Andrew Parsons

Bill 29 imposes new and oppressive rules on the release of government information to the public.

Government claims that the auditor general will have the same powers to examine financial records as he did before.

In his last report, the AG detailed government’s successful efforts to hide documents from his office.

According to the AG, this refusal flew in the face of past practice and he insisted these documents were needed to complete his work.

Under the new rules, that refusal has been enshrined in law and the AG will never be permitted to view them.

In 2010 and 2011, the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (OIPC) took the government to court because, in his view, the government abused the right of solicitor-client privilege by stretching it to areas of information to which it did not apply.

Government lost that case in a unanimous judgement by our Court of Appeal.

Government overruled that judgement through new rules in Bill 29, thereby stretching the notion of solicitor-client privilege for their own ends and trumping the learned opinion of the highest court of the province.

The excuse for this action was asserting “by restructuring the law and making it right we didn’t override the Supreme Court, we just set it right.”

While the government claims that the OIPC remains untouched by Bill 29, many new classes of documents have been created which the OIPC is prohibited from reviewing.

There are more kinds of disputes which must be appealed directly to the courts, bypassing the OIPC.

This will discourage the pursuit of cases simply due to the overwhelming legal costs of litigation.

Previously, the release of cabinet documents was subject to a test to determine if they reflected the substance of the cabinet discussion.

Under the new rules, cabinet papers will include all kinds of materials including documents never ever examined by a cabinet minister.

In the debate, the government claimed that countless numbers of access to information requests somehow blocked up government.

Yet CBC found that there were not thousands of requests.

In fact, last year the 15 departments and over 500 public bodies received an average of only 11 per week.

Others agree

Meanwhile, outside observers have examined the law and found it a regressive step backward.

Duff Conacher heads Democracy Watch, Canada’s leading citizen group advocating democratic reform, government accountability and corporate responsibility. He noted: “There are more loopholes, more exemptions to disclosure of information and they are weakening enforcement as well. When you do this, it’s a double whammy that leads to excessive, unjustifiable secrecy at a greater level.”

No doubt we need a balance between the public’s right to know and government’s need to keep private personal information and cabinet deliberations.

But Bill 29 tips that balance hard on the side of secrecy. Premier Kathy Dunderdale likes to say she is committed to openness, transparency and accountable. If nothing else, this debate has demolished this claim forever.

Now we all know that this government is committed to secrecy, closure and obscurity.

Andrew Parsons is the Liberal MHA

 for Burgeo-La Poile and

the opposition justice critic.

Comments

  • Username
    Gerry
    - June 27, 2012 at 12:53:49

    This government is a simple contradiction of what it supposed to be.

    Submit a comment

  • Username
    John Smith
    - June 25, 2012 at 10:18:49

    Well, I suggest the best thing for young Andy to do is to collect all the information requests that go to court between now and the next election, and present them in the liberal platform. Let's see for real what this bill, which really has been in place now for 3 or 4 years, means to you and me. It might make the Telegram and the CBC work a little harder, but from what I have seen it won't make much difference to you and me. It was the Liberals who oversaw throwing the AG out alltogether, it was the PCs who oversaw that the spending scandal and the breast screening scandal came to light.

    Submit a comment

    • Username
      William Daniels
      - June 28, 2012 at 23:25:18

      Jeez man. This government has been in for 10 yrs now.

  • Username
    Ash
    - June 24, 2012 at 20:58:54

    Bill 29 provides additional protection for people who want to do business with th gov. of NL. It provides public bodies with more flexibility when providing information. AG has full access to every $$$ spent by province. I am pleased with what the privacy commissioner had to say about the Bill. I wish the critics would give it up!!!

    Submit a comment

  • Username
    Ben
    - June 24, 2012 at 19:25:41

    Maybe Andrew should check with his dad about the same changes that the Liberals had planned back in 2002. Its the same people complaining and fear mongering...i think young Parsons has a lot to learn.

    Submit a comment

  • Username
    Terry
    - June 24, 2012 at 15:19:35

    The media has to stop this fearmongering, making this look like something it isn't. Ed Ring came out last week and said that access to information is still strong and in some ways it has been improved. The AG will still see anything he wants to see. This government is in second place in the country in terms of access to information. PLease lets get the facts straight.

    Submit a comment

    • Username
      Eli
      - June 25, 2012 at 10:58:01

      The AG cannot see anything he wants to see. Period!

  • Username
    Ken Collis
    - June 23, 2012 at 13:28:58

    I hate to say it because of the alternatives to date, but I really think that the PC's days are numbered. That is both federally and provincally. I also believe that senior bureaucrats are more to blame for needless changes to these type of laws than the politicians. There is no way, in my opinion, that cabinet ministers could dream that this sort of legistation would not harm their careers, without coersion on the part of trusted advisors. And maybe a little push by Nalcor as well. Just the way big business is pushing Harper.

    Submit a comment

  • Username
    William Daniels
    - June 23, 2012 at 12:56:19

    This government has sealed their own fate with this bill.

    Submit a comment

Submit a comment

Submit a comment (we keep all emails private)
Agreement

We ask that users remain courteous. You may not post insulting, discriminatory or inappropriate content, which may be removed at our discretion. We are not responsible for user content and opinions. Use of this site as well as content submission & ownership are governed by our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.

Member organizations should be non-profit in nature, and promote legal activities. Any organization found promoting illegal activities or commercial products or services will be deleted from the site.

I agree with these conditions.

Advertising

Newsletter

Please enter your email to receive our free newsletter

Subscribe to news alerts
loading...

Tely Twitter

Advertising