Report on the administration of the Access to Information Act 2017-2018

Summary of the purpose of The Access to Information Act

The Access to Information Act (the Act), promulgated on July 1, 1983, aims to broaden access to the records of the federal government. It enshrines the principle of the right of the public to be given information and endeavours to complement arrangements for access to records.

In deference to this legal principle, federal institutions are required to establish standardized practices and procedures for processing access to information requests. These practices and procedures must include an undertaking to make all reasonable efforts to assist applicants, regardless of who they may be. Institutions must also apply the Act in an effective, coordinated and proactive manner so as to provide full, accurate and timely responses to access to information requests, subject only to regulatory constraints.

Annual report prepared in accordance with section 72

This document was prepared in response to section 72 of the Act, which requires federal institutions to submit an annual report to Parliament on administration of the Act. This report provides details on activities related to administration of the Act at Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions (CED).

Mandate of the Institution

CED is part of the Innovation, Science and Economic Development Portfolio, which is comprised of 17 departments and agencies, including the Regional Development Agencies (such as CED) and other federal agencies, such as the National Research Council (NRC) and the Business Development Bank of Canada (BDC). Their mandate is to “further the government’s goal of building a knowledge-based economy in all regions of Canada and to advance the government’s jobs and growth agenda.”

CED is the key economic development player for Quebec’s regions for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). As part of its mission, CED fosters business start-ups and growth. It helps them become more innovative, productive and competitive. It supports efforts to engage the regions of Quebec and attract investments that will help boost the economic well-being of Quebec and Canada.

CED contributes to the economic vitality of all of Quebec’s regions by leveraging their competitive regional advantages, such as wind power and marine technologies. It also supports the transition and diversification of communities that remain dependent on a limited number of sectors or that have been affected by an economic shock, such as the closure of the chrysotile mines.

CED achieves its results by supporting businesses, primarily SMEs, and non-profit organizations (NPOs), through strategic investments. Through its 12 business offices across Quebec’s regions, its engagement strategy and the relationships it has developed with other economic development players, CED stays abreast of the needs of the regions and businesses and is able to offer financial support to carry out projects that support businesses and communities in their economic development efforts.

CED’s Grants and Contributions Programs and Initiatives, in effect in 2017–18

The CED’s main grants and contributions program, the QEDP, came into effect on April 1, 2012. The main recipients of the program are SMEs, business groups or associations and NPOs whose principal mission is to support businesses or economic development. The QEDP includes repayable and non-repayable contributions.

To learn more about the Agency’s mandate, programming and operations, go to its Web site: www.dec-ced.gc.ca.

Access to Information and Privacy Office

CED fulfills its Access to Information Act (ATI) and Privacy Act (PA) responsibilities with an Access to Information and Privacy Office (AIPO) to process requests. The AIPO reports directly to the Deputy Minister / President’s Chief of Staff.

AIPO has an access to information and privacy coordinator, as well as an advisor and a coordinating agent. The coordinator, with the help of the advisor and agent, oversees compliance with legislation, regulations, procedures and broad government trends.

Through its delegated authority, AIPO represents the Agency on matters relating to the Act in dealings with the public, Treasury Board Secretariat, the Commissioners of Information and Privacy and other federal departments and institutions.

CED’s enabling legislation identifies its head as being the Deputy Minister / President. In addition to managing the institution and overseeing management of its personnel, the Deputy Minister / President is responsible for application of the Access to Information Act (AIA).

To this end, the authority for application of the Act was delegated to the Coordinator, Access to Information and Privacy, while most administrative authority was delegated to the Advisor, Access to Information and Parliamentary Affairs.

A copy of the signed and dated delegation order is attached to this report.

Requests received and processed

Over the course of 2017-18, the number of requests received and processed saw a slight decrease over the previous year. However, the 36 requests received are still higher than the average numbers recorded over the last five years. Even if the AIPO registered a 12% decrease compared to last year, the total number of requests received in 2017-2018 is still the second highest number since 2013-2014. There was no request carried over into 2017-18 and one was carried over into the next reporting period. As a result, 35 of the 36 requests processed in 2017-18 were closed during the reporting period.

For the last two fiscal years, CED accepts access to information requests submitted on-line. Over the course of this year, 89% of applicants preferred using this method. However, one downside from this trend is a higher number in requests transferred. Indeed, applicants have a tendency to select the wrong institution from the drop-down menu when they submit a request. Thus, the AIPO transferred five requests to the appropriate institution, which is a 20% increase over 2016-2017.

Source of applicants

Fiscal year 2017-18 saw a diverse breakdown in the source of applicants. We noted that nearly half (47%) of all requests came from media, as compared to 20% in 2016-17 and none 2 years ago. The 2^nd most frequent type of applicant in 2017-18 was public at 33%, followed by organizations and the business sector at 8% each.

Subjects of requests

Year after year, the same pattern can be seen in what requesters are seeking. Again this year, applicants submitted requests for documents related to grants and contributions awarded by CED or for documents pertaining to CED’s internal activities.

Of the 23 requests where documents were provided in 2017-18, 74% were aimed at documents pertaining to CED’s internal activities and 26% related to grants and contributions. This ratio differs considerably from the previous fiscal period where a reverse trend and breakdown was observed. Indeed, 2016-17 saw 78% of documents aimed at grants and contributions and 22% CED’s activities.

Disposition and completion times

The Act stipulates that access requests must normally be answered within 30 calendar days. Excluding transferred and abandoned requests, of the 26 requests closed in 2017-18, 24 (92%) were answered in less than 30 days, as compared to 75% the year before. Of those, 14 requests (58%) were answered prior to day 15.

It is also important to note that the Act provides extensions to the deadlines for requests where consultations are needed with third parties and with other organizations or if the request is for a large number of records. As such, if we count the number of requests closed during the reporting period, only two requests (6%) needed extensions. The AIPO therefore had to extend the deadlines to be able to discharge its obligations under the Act. A response was provided for both of these requests within the timeframes as set out in the Act and prior to day 60. No request was reported late.

In 2017-18, CED received and processed three requests (8%) where no record existed. This represents a considerable drop from the previous year, where that rate stood at 32%. Even if no record was provided, the AIPO still had to process the request, engage with the applicant and coordinate the search for records by the office or primary interest.

Informal Requests

In 2017-18, the number of requests treated informally was comparable to the previous year. There were a total of 21 such requests processed over the reporting period, compared to 23 in 2016-17. This trend could be attributed to the Open Government Website where a user is able to request a copy of the records previously provided in an access to information request.

Exemptions and exclusions invoked

If we take into account the 23 requests where information was provided, the AIPO fully disclosed the information being sought, without invoking protection, for 16 requests (70%). This percentage is higher than last year and the highest it has ever been in the last five years. The AIPO invoked exemptions in the 7 remaining requests (30%). Through its operations, CED mainly holds third party information. Therefore, it is the section most commonly invoked when justifying redacted information. Besides the exemptions detailed in the following table, no exclusion was invoked.

¹ More than one section may be invoked for a given request.

Format of information released

Fiscal year 2017-18 continues the trend for disclosing documents in electronic format, as 96% of respondents preferred this method of disclosure, which is superior to the 74% in the previous year. This also far exceeds the 10% we saw in 2015-16. This trend may be attributed, in part, to CED accepting on-line requests and promoting the disclosure of large number of records electronically. This year again, as this has been the case for many years, no records were consulted in CED’s reading room.

Pages processed and pages disclosed

The total of pages processed and pages disclosed may vary considerably from year to year, depending on the subjects of interest and the quantity of relevant records held by CED. In 2017-18, the number of pages reviewed came out to 764. This is a significant decrease from last year’s all-time high of over 10 000 pages reviewed. As for the number of pages disclosed, they represent 98% of those processed, which meant 749 pages were disclosed to requesters. This is a 12% increase in the pages processed / pages disclosed ratio from last year.

Consultations and extensions

Because of the nature of the CED’s operations, mainly aimed at allocating financial assistance to SMEs and organizations, it is not unusual when processing requests to consult with third parties, which leads to the extension of the time limit as stipulated in the Act. In addition, consultations with other federal institutions are sometimes needed when processing request, thus also requiring time extensions. There were seven (30%) requests that required such consultations over the reporting period.

As mentioned earlier, in order to comply with the Act, extensions were granted in 2 out of 23 (9%) requests where records were provided, which is lower than the 37% last year. This is a considerable statistic if you consider that consultations with third parties and with other federal institutions were required in 7 files. In both cases, applicants were advised of the time limit extension of no more than 30 days in accordance with the Act and each request was answered within the allotted time. Therefore, for every request closed during the reporting period, CED processed each file within the deadline regardless if an extension was taken or not.

Consultations with Privy Council Office

There was no consultation conducted with the Privy Council Office for fiscal year 2017-18. Indeed, of the information requested, none required a confirmation whether cabinet confidences (section 69 of the Act) were included. This continues the same trend as seen in the last two years.

Consultations received from other institutions

For this current year, the AIPO processed a total of 86 consultations from other federal institutions, which is an increase of 132% over the 37 consultations closed in 2017-18. These requests account for a total of 619 pages to process, as compared to the 228 pages processed last year.

Of these 86 consultations, a recommendation for full disclosure was made in 73 requests (85%) and for partial disclosure in the remaining 13 requests. Almost all of these requests, being 98%, were processed within 15 days.

Fees collected and waived

The AIPO complies with the guidelines of the Treasury Board Secretariat with regard to access fees collected and waived. In 2017-18, a net amount of $110 was collected in application fees. No other amount was collected for any type of fee. Fourteen requests had their application fees waived. The AIPO waived these fees to split one request into 15 requests as they targeted distinct files. As for the transferred requests, their application fees were reported once and only by the institution that initially received the request.

Costs

The costs related to administering the Act during the reporting period reached $114,120, an increase of 13% from last year. This included $109,086 in salaries and $5,034 for travel, training, software licensing, supplies and translation.

A copy of the 2017-18 statistical report on the administration of the Access to Information Act is attached to this report.

In 2017-18, no training session was delivered to CED employees, as it is normally offered every other year. However, the AIPO remains available to deliver specific training to employees, whose duties call for a certain grasp of matters that relate to the protection of personal information.

However, in anticipation of Bill C-58, which will amend the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, a number of meetings were held in order to increase the awareness of employees which will be called upon to implement the new proactive disclosure requirements.

Lastly, in 2017-18, CED’s Access to Information and Privacy Coordinator became an associated faculty member of the Canada School of Public Service. In that capacity, he delivered courses titled “Access to Information in the Government of Canada” and “Privacy in the Government of Canada Privacy in the Government of Canada”.

Implementation plan for Bill C-58: Act to amend the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts

An implementation plan was put into place in order for CED to comply with the new proactive disclosure requirements once royal assent is given to Bill C-58, which will amend the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts. This plan details the actions CED has to undertake to proactively disclose new information, such as Briefing packages for new or changing deputy heads, briefing package prepared for the deputy head and public servants for parliamentary committee appearances and titles and tracking numbers of briefing notes to submitted to the minister and deputy heads.

Complaints and investigations

The AIPO did not receive any new complaint over the course of the year and for a fifth consecutive year.

One complaint, received in July 2012, reached its outcome during the reporting period. At issue was how section 20(1)(b) was applied to documents showing contribution amounts claimed by CED’s client and ultimately paid out. Weighing the amount of time that had elapsed, the AIPO reached out to the client in order to reassess the representations they had provided in a consultation when the file was initially processed back in March 2012. The third party agreed to fully release 11 of the 15 pages targeted by the request. The AIPO maintained its refusal to disclose the remaining 4 pages. In its final findings report, the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada concluded that CED had properly invoked the exception for those 4 pages. The complaint was recorded as well-founded and resolved.

The AIPO systematically consults each third party whenever documents contain information described in paragraph 20(1)(b). They may provide representations as to why the record or part thereof should not be disclosed. In order to invoke this exception, the AIPO ensures that the information meets all four requirements under paragraph 20(1)(b), as per the Annotated Access to Information Act.

Audits

CED was not the subject of any audit over the reporting period.

Monitoring of the processing time

The AIPO ensures the time to process access to information requests is monitored through a weekly report of on-going requests. The report provides the details of each request, such as the due date and current status, i.e. documents being retrieved, under review, in consultation or in the approval process. This report is distributed to CED’s senior management, including its Deputy Head.

Since 2011, the AIPO has equipped itself with software to manage and track access to information requests and privacy requests. This program makes it easier to follow every activity and task related to any request and serves as a tool to monitor processing time to comply with the provisions on timeframes as set out in the Act.

The President, pursuant to section 73 of the Access to Information Act, hereby designates the persons holding the positions set out in the schedule hereto, or the persons occupying on an acting basis those positions, to exercise the powers, duties and functions of the President as the head of the Economic Development Agency for the Regions of Quebec, under the provisions of the Act and related regulations set out in the schedule opposite each position. This designation replaces all previous delegation orders.

* Legal advice obtained beforehand

I approve the delegation schedule.

Name of institution: Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions

Reporting period: 2017-04-01 to 2018-03-31

Part 1 – Requests under the Access to Information Act

Note: All requests previously recorded as “treated informally” will now be accounted for in this section only.

Part 2: Requests Closed During the Reporting Period

* I.A.: International Affairs Def.: Defence of Canada S.A.: Subversive Activities

2.5 Complexity

2.6 Deemed refusals

Part 3 – Extensions

Part 4 – Fees

Part 5: Consultations Received From Other Institutions and Organizations

Part 6: Completion Time of Consultations on Cabinet Confidences

Part 7: Complaints and Investigations

Part 8: Court Action

Part 9: Resources Related to the Access to Information Act

Note: Enter values to two decimal places.