|
|
|
|
|||||
|
||||||||
|
|
Submissions | |
|
||||
|
Consultation - Heads of Communications
Date: March 12, 2001
Highlights of Discussions
This synopsis highlights the main points made in discussions at each of the roundtables and during the plenary sessions. This synopsis does not represent minutes or verbatim transcripts but rather a summary in point form of the views of those participating in the various discussion groups during the consultation.
Participating Institutions (13)
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Canada Information Office
Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Department of Justice Canada
Department of National Defence
Environment Canada
Human Resources Development Canada
Industry Canada
National Archives of Canada
Privy Council Office
Public Works and Government Services Canada
Statistics Canada
Treasury Board Secretariat
Part 1: Issues and Solutions
Participants were asked to identify the issues or problems that, if they were solved, would make a significant contribution to the success of access to information from the point of view of the communications community. They were also asked to identify the possible solutions. The highlights that follow summarize the participants' issues and recommendations for improvements.
Improving access to information would require increasing awareness of the Act through mandatory training for all public servants. Participants noted that interpretation of the Act varies from department to department and that this, along with decisions from recent court cases have all led to some confusion. Clarifying the point at which communications materials need to be developed might eliminate the need for developing communications materials for every draft of a report or other document. It is not always evident which products constitute advice to the Minister and when they should be protected. Lack of sufficient knowledge at all levels, including in communications branches, was noted as sometimes helping to create unnecessary issues and crises that often adds to the workload of communications officers. Media lines, other materials for public release, as well as ministerial briefings are examples of the kind of work frequently needed to respond to such situations.
Including communications sectors and branches at the outset of an access request through an "early warning system" rather than waiting until the end of the process should be the norm. Waiting until the end ignores that it is legitimate for Ministers and Departments to want to manage their communications. It should not however, be a cause of delays. Having a communication resource person assigned to Access was identified as a possible solution. Communications branches need sufficient working days to review files and provide sound advice on communications issues. Waiting until the last moment to include communications adds to the perception that access is an "add-on" to the work of communications units as opposed to an integral part of their work. It also places communications officers in a "time-crunch" that increases workload and stress.
Appropriately addressing the perception that ATI places a constraint on frank written communications would help ensure that the federal communications community is able to provide forthright strategic advice to Ministers on communications issues.
Ensuring that ATIP officers are part of a cohesive "functional community" in which appropriate training is provided and knowledge about priority issues is the norm would allow for better advice to communications offices on the nature of the information being disclosed and the kinds of communications materials required.
Reviewing the 30-day limit for processing access requests, especially
those involving large amounts of material, could lead to more realistic
deadlines. The current Act treats all requests equally, regardless of
complexity, volume, etc. More flexibility in the legislation on time lines
as well as on dealing with requesters at the initial stage to narrow and
scale down the broad "fishing net" type of requests would provide
for better service. More consistency across government for handling voluminous
requests and requests from information brokers, lawyers and other commercial
users of the Act would also enhance the process.
Standardizing to the extent possible the application of the Act across departments would help eliminate inconsistent interpretation and facilitate better public understanding of what the Act may achieve. Increased training and sharing of best practices as well as clarification of the impact of recent court cases would also lead to greater consistency across departments as would increased departmental sharing of information. The increased sensitivity to access issues in government departments has led to increased co-operation and sharing of information within and between communications branches, which supports more consistency in the application of the Act.
Improving information management practices within the Public Service and stemming the loss of corporate memory would enable communications offices to provide a more complete range of communications advice generally. Control is often lacking over drafts, transitory information, final copies and disposition of records, among other issues. Having available a standardized and inclusive electronic records management system could facilitate more timely and comprehensive communications planning by officers.
Ensuring that all public servants are aware that e-mails are records
of government that must be properly managed would reduce the number
of times communications offices are required to deal with the public communications
issues arising from inappropriate use of e-mails. Central agencies have
a key role in providing appropriate training in the management of electronic
documents.
Encouraging routine disclosure of information, as endorsed in the Act, has resulted in fewer last minute public communications issues in some departments. It also has the potential to counter the perception that government communications is merely "spin-doctoring". Originally the Access to Information Act was set up as a tool of last resort for people seeking information from the government. Participants felt, however, that it seems increasingly to be the method of choice for many requesters and some departments because it provides a coherent procedure with clear steps and rules and a legislated right to complain.
Part II: Summary of Discussion on Pro- Active Release of Information
Considerable changes in the public service environment and political will are a prerequisite for more pro-active release of information. The Government on Line initiative will encourage more information dissemination and for a considerable time there will be a dual system (manual and electronic) which will help provide momentum for changes in the public service environment that will be conducive to more proactive release. It is likely that program officers will have increased responsibility to be aware of access and privacy rules. Information management issues will have to be addressed.
Participants felt that pro-active release would have a significant
resource impact for members of their community because communications
officers would be at the front line in responding to the increased number
of questions from the public and media. Additionally, they would need
to ensure that Ministers are prepared for the public response to potentially
controversial information. The resource implications of more pro-active
release of information via web sites and other electronic formats could
also include re-allocation of monies for preparing, editing and translating
documents for release electronically, as well as responding to increased
inquiries from the media and the general public seeking more detailed
information.
Government openness and transparency would be perceived to be increasing as a result of more pro-active release, which should mean a public better informed about policy development and government decision-making. Pro-active release is consistent with other government initiatives such as Government on Line and with commitments to greater accountability and citizen-centred government, as outlined in the Speech from the Throne. However, "crises" situations for communications branches may be the outcome of placing increasing amounts of information on the Internet, especially for federal institutions in which internal communications is irregular. The current environment strives to be relatively "surprise free".
More pro-active release could have impacts on accountability and on the way government business is conducted. Under ATI there is a structure with specific responsibilities. Responsibilities for pro-active release would have to be identified. Participants felt that there are issues related to quality control, messaging and positioning of information that need to be addressed for pro-active release. For example, how user friendly the information needs to be must be determined. For a majority of people raw data may be less useful than information that has been analysed and written in a straightforward manner.
A decrease in the number of requests for information under access
may not automatically be the outcome of more pro-active release of information.
In fact, pro-active release could lead to more requests for departmental
documents in order to obtain more details.
Although special interests may benefit from pro-active release of large volumes of information, such as contract information, this could tie up resources and be of limited interest to the general public.
Information should be released through all public communications channels (e.g. print and electronic media, spokespersons, press conferences) not just on the Internet.
Employment is created if information is seen as a national resource. Those who are in the business of manipulating data for re-sale and communications businesses that handle government communications issues would benefit from more accessible information.
Part III. Additional Observations and Issues Suggested for the Task Force to Explore
The relationship between Ministers' offices and corporate communications groups in preparing for the release of information without affecting the timeliness of the release is important. Frequent briefings may be required for high profile issues.
Consistency across government in responding to wide-ranging requests for large volumes of material is needed. Complying with such requests is resource intensive; sharing best practices would be instructive.
An education/information program on the Access to Information Act for employees should be instituted to ensure that everyone might meet their obligations under the Act.
Dealing with requests that are wide-ranging and voluminous may mean differentiating between reasonable requests and those that are "frivolous and vexatious". Valuable human and financial resources may be ineffectively spent on the latter.
Recommendations from the Task Force should be grounded in research
as much as principles. In reviewing the access needs of special interest
groups as well as the right of the general public to know about government
programs and decisions, the government should ensure that particular interests
do not monopolize the available resources.
