Annual Report to Parliament on the Administration of the Access to Information Act 2014-2015

1. INTRODUCTION

The purpose of the Access to Information Act (Act) is to provide Canadian citizens and residents with a right of access to information under the control of government institutions.

This Annual Report was prepared in accordance with section 72 of the Act, which stipulates that annual reports on access to information shall be tabled in Parliament.

2. ABOUT THE CIVILIAN REVIEW AND COMPLAINTS COMMISSION FOR THE ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE

On November 28, 2014, the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (CRCC) came into existence pursuant to the Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability Act, SC 2013, c. 18, s. 35. The CRCC replaced the former Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP (CPC), assuming the same mandate but with the addition of supplementary powers and duties. As did its predecessor, the CRCC provides civilian review of RCMP members' conduct in performing their policing duties so as to hold the RCMP accountable to the public.

The CRCC's main role is to take public complaints about members of the RCMP. These complaints are then forwarded to the RCMP for initial investigation as mandated by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act; however, if the complainant is dissatisfied with the response that he or she receives from the RCMP, the CRCC will review the complaint with a view to determining the reasonableness of the RCMP's response. In appropriate cases, the CRCC will undertake its own investigation or hearing into a complaint. The Chair of the CRCC also has the power to file his or her own complaint if he or she feels that a matter is deserving of investigation.

Additionally, even in the absence of a public complaint, the CRCC is empowered to conduct a review of RCMP activities to evaluate compliance with legislation, regulations, ministerial directions, policy, procedures and/or guidelines.

3. NOTE ABOUT FIGURES

The figures and statistics discussed in this report with respect to the CRCC reflect the combined Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) activities of both the former CPC (until November 27, 2014) and the new CRCC (as of November 28, 2014) during the reporting period of April 1, 2014 through March 31, 2015.

4. ATIP RESPONSIBILITIES

At the CRCC, the Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) Unit consists solely of the ATIP Coordinator. The ATIP Coordinator processes all requests from the public and consultations from other departments or agencies. The ATIP Coordinator also provides advice to CRCC employees and senior officials on ATIP-related matters, prepares annual statistical reports, ensures the ongoing accuracy of Info Source, prepares completed Access to Information summaries for proactive disclosure on the CRCC's website, participates in forums for the ATIP community and monitors changes in ATIP policy, guidelines and directives.

When processing requests and consultations under the Access to Information and Privacy Acts, the ATIP Coordinator also benefits from some administrative assistance from personnel in the Information Management Unit of the CRCC.

The Executive Director, under delegated authority from the Minister of Public Safety, provides the final approval for all responses on ATIP requests and consultations.

5. DELEGATION ORDER

The Minister of Public Safety has delegated full authority under the Act to the CRCC Chair and Executive Director. The Minister has also delegated administrative duties and functions to the CRCC ATIP Coordinator. The most recent delegation order was signed by the Minister of Public Safety on January 18, 2012 (see Annex A).

6. ACCESS TO INFORMATION REQUESTS RECEIVED

During the course of the reporting period, the four (4) Access to Information requests that had been carried forward from the previous year were completed. Sixteen (16) new requests were also received. Of these new requests, fourteen (14) were completed during the reporting period and two (2) were carried forward to the following year. Therefore, a total of eighteen (18) requests were completed during the reporting period.

Many of the requests received by the CRCC under the Act were from either former complainants to the CRCC or RCMP members complained about, typically seeking further details about the investigation and review of their files, as well as the information upon which the RCMP and the CRCC based their decisions (e.g. transcripts, reports, correspondence and other types of evidence).

The CRCC also received three (3) media requests for public complaint records within a certain geographic area, but these were later abandoned. There were a couple of requests from businesses seeking information about contracts for office supplies and equipment, as well as an academic request for information about public complaints within a particular province.

7. STATISTICAL REPORT

The CRCC processed a significant number of pages in responding to Access to Information requests in the 2014-2015 reporting year (i.e. 7,063 pages).

Although the sixteen (16) Access to Information requests received during the 2014‑2015 year was less than the number received in the preceding three (3) years (i.e. 23 in 2013-2014, 26 in 2012-2013 and 18 in 2011-2012)), the number of pages processed in 2014-2015 was higher, more than double in two cases, than each of the previous three years (i.e. 2,972 in 2013-2014, 6,622 in 2012-2013 and 2,552 in 2011-2012).

The CRCC claimed exemptions under paragraph 13(1)(c) (Information obtained in confidence from a province), sub-paragraph 16(1)(a)(i) (Information obtained or prepared by an investigative body), paragraph 16(1)(b) (Investigative techniques), paragraph 16(1)(c) (Information that could be injurious to the enforcement of any law of Canada or lawful investigations), subsection 16(2) (Information that could facilitate the commission of an offence), subsection 19(1) (Personal information) and paragraph 21(1)(a) (Advice or recommendations) of the Act. As the majority of the material requested originated with other departments and external consultation was often required, extensions were taken in fourteen (14) of the eighteen (18) requests completed last year.

There was only one (1) request that was not completed within the statutory deadline. In that case, an extension was taken, but the CRCC was not able to complete the request within the extended deadline due to the volume of records requested.

Finally, the CRCC processed twelve (12) consultations from other institutions in 2014–2015.

See Annex B for the Statistical Report.

8. TRAINING

One staff member in the CRCC's Operations Unit attended three days of ATIP training off‑site.

No training was offered in-house during the reporting period.

9. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES

The most significant change during the fiscal year 2014-2015 was the creation of the CRCC, which assumed all of the functions and duties of the former CPC, including all of its outstanding ATIP files. The transition was smooth since the existing staff and premises of the CPC were assumed by the CRCC. Therefore, there was no impact on the public.

The CRCC did not implement any new policies, guidelines or procedures related to Access to Information during the reporting period.

10. MONITORING OF TIMELINESS

The CRCC monitors the time to process Access to Information requests through its case management software. The ATIP Coordinator keeps track of upcoming deadlines for requests and consultations and advises the Head and senior management on an as-needed basis. This has proven to be an effective means of ensuring timelines are adhered to.

11. COMPLAINTS

During the reporting period, there was one (1) complaint filed against the CRCC. The complainant had submitted a request for information and was advised by the CRCC of the requirement to submit the prescribed application fee of $5. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC).

Upon investigation, the OIC concluded that the CRCC had advised the requester of the fee by letter that included contact information in the event the requester had any questions. The requester was found not to have contacted the CRCC with regard to this fee. When the OIC consulted the CRCC, the CRCC expressed a willingness to process the request under the Privacy Act, thereby eliminating the need for a fee.

The OIC determined that the CRCC had acted within its rights to request the required fee and that there was no evidence that the requester had requested a fee waiver; thus, it found that the complaint was not well founded.

There were no audits or investigations conducted during the reporting period.

Appendix A: Delegation Order

The Minister of Public Safety Canada, pursuant to section 73 of the Access to Information Act*, hereby designates the persons holding the positions set out below, or acting in those positions, to exercise the powers and perform the duties and functions of the Minister as the head of a government institution, that is, the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP, under the section of the Act set out opposite each position.

Dated, at the City of Ottawa, 18th of January 2012.

Signed by the Honourable Vic Toews, P.C., Q.C., M.P., Minister of Public Safety Canada

Appendix B: Statistical Report