In a standoff that goes back to Parliamentary Budget Office attempts to obtain information from 65 federal government departments and agencies on the effect of spending cuts from the 2012 budget, the office has filed a total of 33 access requests since last August to departments and agencies that had earlier refused to provide information or did not respond to requests.
Since then, the Parliamentary Budget Office, which became a large thorn in Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) side after he established it as part of his government’s accountability measures in 2008, has filed another nine requests unrelated to the 2012 budget, and has been required by three departments to spend $1,200 extra for the extra costs of gathering the information. Mr. Frechette established a budget of only $5,000 for access to information submissions when he took over the office last September.
The extraordinary situation, where an agent of Parliament appointed by the Prime Minister, has to pay for information it should normally be able to obtain without cost and without resorting to the Access to Information Act, stems from a string of standoffs between former Parliamentary budget officer Kevin Page and the government’s insistence the request for data about the effect of spending cuts—rather than spending—is the mandate of the Parliament budget officer.
But Mr. Frechette, a former Library of Parliament director who specialized in economics and government estimates, has taken up Mr. Page’s fight after assuming his position and criticized the government in an interview about the standoff on Thursday.
“The legislation [the Parliament of Canada Act] is there, and provides for free and timely access to information required by the PBO to conduct his or her activity, so I mean the legislation is there,” Mr. Frechette said.
“If people are interpreting the legislation differently, well I’m sorry, the legislation is clear for me. Parliament should not have to pay for, or an employee of Parliament, the Library of Parliament, in this case, should not have to pay for this kind of information,” he said.
“The legislation is there and that’s exactly what I told my Parliamentary colleagues and partners, and they support me, they understand that,” Mr. Frechette said.
NDP MP Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, Man.), who chairs the House of Commons Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics Committee, said it is “absurd” the Parliamentary Budget Office should have to pay for information the government is normally required to provide under the law that established the office.
“It’s an absurd, almost Orwellian notion that the Parliamentary budget officer should have to file ATI (Access to Information) requests to get information on government programs and operations,” Mr. Martin said.
“I’m appalled that the government would refuse to cooperate with the PBO on such a reasonable and innocuous request, it’s a fundamental cornerstone of democracy that the public has a right to know what their government is doing with their money, but it’s like they [the government] refuse to accept that government is accountable to Parliament, they refuse to acknowledge that it's not their information to hoard and protect,” Mr. Martin said.
“That information belongs to the people of Canada who paid for it and own it and have a right to access it subject to a very few legitimate exceptions like national security or commercial sensitivity. It shouldn’t be like pulling teeth to get information out of these characters,” said Mr. Martin, who last fall took over the Privacy, Access and Ethics Committee after serving as chair of the Government Operations Committee.
Out of the 33 departments and agencies who received the access to information submissions, 24 have provided final responses, although a source in the budget office said only one response provided even “somewhat useful” information. Of the other nine access to information filings, seven of the departments or agencies have yet to respond.
Some of the government’s largest departments, including Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, and Fisheries and Oceans Canada refused to respond to the initial round of requests for information.
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency did not respond to the initial requests for information and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service did not respond.
Original Article
Source: hilltimes.com/
Author: TIM NAUMETZ
No comments:
Post a Comment