page 12

feature

the other press

October 3, 1977

‘343

o freedom of information

 

by Tom Riley
for Canadian University
Press

 

 

of the government.

 

Secrecy. The withholding of
documents. An iron curtain
of secrecy clamped firmly
against the prying eyes of
the public, with no right to
information that is collected

and compiled on behalf of
the people. Obsessiveness
with secrecy that can only
lead to distrust on the part of
the people.

And where is this country
that consistently denies its
citizens the fundamental
right to know what informa-
tion its government is basing
decisions on and why? Well,
right here in Canada, as a
matter of fact.

Exaggerated you say? Not
really, as there are no stat-
utes on thé books that say
the government has to prov-
ide information to the public.
It releases only what - it
chooses to release. In the
House of Commons there are

the 1973 guidelines for notice
of motion for the production
of papers. However, there

are 16 exemptions under

these guidelines (of informa-
tion not available) and, as
many an MP who has tried to
get information can testify,
are so broad that re-
quests are turned down
daily. Access to information
by members of parliament

really exists only in theory.

Examples abound showing
that information is being
withheld on a grand scale
and that the government
only gives up what it decides
is in its best interests.

In this past session of
Parliament we have seen the
Sky Shops affair, the Judges
affair, the secret list of 21
(now there are even more
lists, including one on feder-
al NDP leader Ed Broadbent,
who has wondered aloud
what he has done to get on a
list), Polysar, the Atomic
Energy Canada Limited nuc-

lear reactor sales kickbacks
and the RCMP’s covert op-
erations against |’ Agence
Press Libre (which led to the
Liberals naming an RCMP
inquiry after steadfastly say-
ing an inquiry was unneces-
sary. The about-face came
after RCMP Commissioner
Maurice Nadon called for an
inquiry and effectively def-
used the controversy in the
House.)

Recently, there was Can-
ada’s involvement in the
uranium cartel price-fixing
scandal. And, during that

- particular juicy case, the

government ‘in September
1976 passed an. order-in-
council which prohibits any
discussion of the documents
involving the cartel and
makes it an offence for any
erson with access to the’
documents to show them.
e documents were avail-
able to only a few members

The justification? It was
done, said the government,
in the name of the people of
Canada, to protect them and
their interests. Yet, the doc-
uments are available to the
U.S. Congress and U.S.
courts and the U.S. press

while here in Canada MPs -

cannot see the documents let
alone private citizens, who
might like to see the docu-
ments to decide for them-

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
  
  
  
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
  
   
   
 
 

Above: Tom Riley

 

| Below: Ged Baldwin = | >

 

selves on the actions of the
government in forming the
cartel.

These are just a few exam-
ples of the withholding of
information in Parliament. In
each of these cases the
government can withstand
questions from the Opposi-
tion because it forms the
majority in the House and
party discipline is very tight.
The average MP votes ac-
cording to the dictates of the
party; free votes are very
rare.

Yet, the problem of secrecy
and the lack of access to
public documents goes
beyond Parliament. It ex-
tends to all government de-
partments and agencies.
What we can see is what the
government decides we
should see or wants to re-
lease.

That means the government
of the day can manipulate
information as it chooses to
its political advantage. It also
means the bureaucrats can
continue to hoard informa-
tion and build power. Civil
servants who feel an issue
should be aired often resort
to the inspired press leak,
breaking either their oath of
secrecy or, if the documents
have been classified, the
Official Secrets Act. It has
been estimated that 80 per
cent of government docu-
ments are classified as either
top secret, secret, confiden-
tial or restricted.

In the final analysis, the

question becomes how can
people make rational deci-
sions if all the facts are not
available? ©

The government has made
some concessions and intro-
duced a green policy paper
titled legislation on Public
Access to Government Doc-
uments which discusses leg-
islative options. But the

green paper is only a discus-
sion paper and has no actual
legislation in sight. Some’
observers predict none until
after the next federal elec-
tion, despite enormous pub-

  

lic support for access to
information.

It is this attitude of entren-
ched secrecy and refusal to
open up the dusty files which

led to the call for a Freedom
of Information Act. The de-
mand is for easy access to all
levels of government, and an

independent review mech- .

anism to the courts when a
request for information is
denied.

This is not to say that some
information should be ex-
empt. Advocates of a Free-
dom of Information Act
readily recognize that goy-
ernment cannot be run in a
goldfish bowl. ©

However, any exemptions
such as national security,
international affairs or in-
vestigative files need to be
clearly defined. For exam-
ple, in the case of investiga-
tive files there is no intention
to stop investigations by the
police in ongoing criminal
inquiries but a request for
access by people when the
file becomes inactive or after
a certain time period. The
U.S. Freedom of Information
Act allows for this access;
the FBI has received thou-
sands of requests for inform-
ation and has released files.

Conservative MP Gerald
Baldwin (Peace River), long-
time information advocate
and crusader, says the end to

 

 

SFU awarded

Simon Fraser University
has been awarded $53,000 by
the Solicitor-General’s De-
partment for studies in Cri-
monology.

Ezzat Fattah, criminololgy
department head said, fe
university will use the grant
to study Matsqui medium
security penitentiary and the
new medium security prison
in Mission.

The funds will also be used
to uevate a study on crime
trends and patterns in the
provinces. In other studies,
B.C. has consistently had the
highest crime rate in Can-
ada.

The criminology depart-
ment is also planning to do a
study of the effectiveness of
neighbourhood crime _pre-
vention programs in B.C.,
such as Vancouver’s Operat-
ion Identification.

““‘We want to see if crime
is reduced by these pro-

grams, or if it increased in
other neighbourhoods which
don’t have the protection,”’
Fattah said.

Other criminology resear-
ch centres to get grants are:
University of Toronto-$90,
000; University of Montreal-
$80,000; and the University
of Regina-$15,000.

Among the cases at the
University of Toronto is a
long term study of the impact
of discretion by police and
the courts on the fairness
and efficiency of the justice
system.

The University of Mon-
treal’s funds would be con-
tributed to organize confer-
ences on such topics as long
term imprisonment, hostage-
taking and political terror-
ism.

The Regina research is for
crime, delinquency and ad-
minstration of justice on the
Prairies, with special atten-
tion to natives.

secrecy must come because
people are vecoming increas
ingly disillusioned with gov
ernments and want some
thing better.

He is not alone. Pressure
for a good information law is
increasing. Groups have
sprung up across the country
in the last 18 months demand
ing that governments take
action.

Based in Ottawa is Acess, a ‘
Canadian committee for the
right to public information
which represents nearly
three million Canadians.

Access membership includes
the Canadian Daily News-
papers Publishers Asso-
ciation, the Canadian Com-
munity Newspapers Asso-

ciation, The Newspaper
Guild (all three. of these
groups passed resolutions at
their annual conventions cal-
ling for enactment of infor-
mation laws at all levels of

government), the Canadian
Labour Congress, the Public
Service Alliance of Canada,
the Canadian Teachers Fed-
eration, the Canadian Nature
Federation and the Canadian
Association of Social
Workers.

In addition to these groups

* and a host of citizens groups

which have emerged to
demand an information act, a_

 

non-partisan: committee of |
MPs was formed in the |

Commons to push for legis-,
lation. Liberal MP Lloyd

Francis heads the committee

which includes Gerald Ba-
Idwin, Ray Hnatushun and
Andrew Brewin. They hope
to build a broad base of
non-patisan support in the
House. ~

Baldwin heads another
group, the League to Restore
Parliamentary Control,
which has an advertisement
campaign in daily and co-
mmunity newspapers across
Canada asking people to sign

the ads, which call. for
freedom of information le-
gislation and more gover-
nment accountability for the
tax dollar. Baldwin says
response to the campaign
has been encouraging.

The campaign by the Can-
adian Bar Association is
perhaps next to Baldwin’s
the most widely publicized of
them all.
convention in August, 1976
the association devoted an

entire day to freedom of
information. One event was
a panel discussion between
former Liberal cabinet min-

ister John Turner, Nader,

Baldwin, former Council

- president Mitchell Sharp and

Ontario deputy attorney-
general Roy Callaghan,
which was chaired by Justice
Thomas Berger.

The discussion led to- the
passing of a freedom of
information resolutions with
only one dissenting vote.

 

 

cont'd. page 15

At its annual -

 

ie

 

 

ee