Seekers of information win one against Liberal government secrecy (BC)
Seekers of information win one against Liberal government secrecy Vaughn Palmer Vancouver Sun Friday, January 25, 2008 VICTORIA - Environmentalists have scored a hard-won victory in the fight to make the B.C. Liberals show more respect for the access to information law. A group of eight environmental associations had complained directly to the information commissioner, alleging an across-government effort to frustrate their requests for records and other information. The group cited numerous examples of requests stalled, records censored and unreasonable fees charged. The evidence covered three ministries over a period of two years. The government's first response was to try to get the entire case dismissed. The Liberals argued that complaints under the provincial law had to be heard on a case-by-case basis. Aggregated complaints were not appropriate. They would surely have understood the consequences of splitting the case into myriad separate complaints. The eight organizations probably wouldn't have the resources or the time to go that route. Plus any pattern of systematic discrimination would be missed if the complaints were heard piecemeal. Happily, the government failed to suffocate the case in the cradle. "We determined there was a basis for conducting a systematic investigation and that such an investigation could be conducted fairly and without prejudice," information commissioner David Loukidelis ruled. But he did exclude some aspects of the initial complaint. Allegations of undue censorship were set aside because there were not enough viable examples to establish a pattern. For similar reasons, the commissioner set aside the case against two of the three targeted ministries, agriculture and forests. That put the focus on a single ministry -- environment -- and allegations that it was responding to requests for information with excessive delays and unreasonable fees. The investigation looked into 34 requests over the two-year period. The commissioner's office pressed the ministry for details on delays and fees, plus comparable data for how other requests are handled across government. The ministry served up a grab bag of excuses for not being able to get to the bottom of things, from incompatible data-tracking systems to inexplicable gaps in the record to inconsistencies and errors. Whether this added to suspicions about the government's good intentions, the commissioner was too polite to say. Again, happily, the lead investigator, Catherine Tully, persisted. By the end, she had enough data to identify an unmistakable pattern. The environment ministry was taking an average of 74 days to respond to requests for information from the group of eight. The government-wide average is 45 days, never mind that the law allows no more than 30 days. "An extraordinarily long average processing time," Loukidelis observed. The investigation also found that the ministry was dinging the group of eight for fees at roughly twice the rate of others seeking information. "It appeared there might be some basis for the allegation of a systematic problem," the commissioner concluded, with dry understatement. Rather than proceed further with the investigation, the commissioner presented the preliminary evidence to the ministry. Whereupon the government sued for peace. The settlement, shaped by the information commissioner and agreed to by the eight associations, was announced this week along with the findings of the investigation. The environment ministry was persuaded to adopt a detailed plan to improve its handling of information requests in general and requests from the group of eight in particular. Better tracking of requests. Prompt responses. Minimal resort to fees. More respect for the spirit of the law. Liaison with the group of eight. And periodic reporting on the handling of requests, with the first report card due at the end of this month. The agreement -- or backdown -- was hailed as unprecedented. "The first time any individual ministry has been spotlighted like this," said Darrell Evans, executive director of the Freedom of Information and Privacy Association. "The fact that they've got to do a report card is really significant." Other ministries take note: "It's a good recipe for how you should behave handing requests. That's never really been put down in this nice, obvious way before." But Evans and others were careful not to get carried away, given the unusual circumstances in this case. "The complainants were sophisticated groups with extensive experience using the access provisions of the act," as Louk-idelis noted. The eight were also able to draw on the resources and expertise of the environmental law clinic at the University of Victoria. In essence, the environment ministry was shamed into reforming its handling of information requests by a well-prepared, strongly backed and stubborn group of complainants. No guarantee this will persuade the Liberals to be any more forthcoming in handling routine requests for information. vpalmer@direct.ca © The Vancouver Sun 2008 Inserted from <http://www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=dbadaf98-d043-4367-8532-64c5f4903a01>
Posts
