2015 to 2016 Annual report on the Access to Information Act

The Access to Information Act (Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985, Chapter A-1) was proclaimed on July 1, 1983. The Act was amended as a result of the royal assent of the Federal Accountability Act on December 12, 2006. Certain provisions came into force on December 12, 2006, and others took effect on April 1, 2007, and September 1, 2007.

The Access to Information Act gives Canadian citizens, permanent residents as well as individuals and corporations present in Canada a right of access to information contained in government records subject to certain specific and limited exceptions.

Section 72 of the Access to Information Act requires that the head of every federal government institution prepare, for submission to Parliament, an annual report on the administration of the Act within their institution during each fiscal year.

This annual report provides a summary of the management and administration of the Access to Information Act within Public Services and Procurement Canada for the fiscal year 2015 to 2016.

Part I: Introduction

1. Background

The Department, founded in 1841 and originally known as The Board of Works, was instrumental in the building of our nation's canals, roads and bridges, the Houses of Parliament, post offices and federal buildings across the country.

In 1993, the Department became Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) through the amalgamation of the former Supply and Services Canada, Public Works Canada, Government Telecommunications Agency (Communications Canada), and the Translation Bureau (Secretary of State of Canada). In November 2015, the Department's name changed to Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC).

The Department of Public Works and Government Services Act, passed in 1996, established the current Department and set out the legal authorities for PSPC services. The Act established PSPC as a common service organization that provides government departments, boards and agencies with support services for their programs.

PSPC employs approximately 12,500 permanent employees working in locations across Canada and headquartered in the National Capital Area.

The Office of the Procurement Ombudsman, an independent office, and part of the portfolio of the Minister of Public Services and Procurement, was established on May 5, 2008, as one of the final steps in the implementation of the Federal Accountability Act.

2. Raison d'être and responsibilities

PSPC plays an important role in the daily operations of the Government of Canada. It supports federal departments and agencies in the achievement of their mandated objectives as their central purchasing agent, real property manager, linguistic authority, treasurer, accountant, pay and pension administrator, and common service provider. The Department's vision is to excel in government operations, and our strategic outcome and mission is to deliver high-quality, central programs and services that ensure sound stewardship on behalf of Canadians and meet the program needs of federal institutions. The goal is to manage business in a way that demonstrate integrity, accountability, efficiency, transparency, and adds value for client departments and agencies, and Canadians.

PSPC is a leader in transforming its back-office. By enabling government-wide critical programs and services as well as delivering major transformation initiatives, the Department is helping the Government of Canada do business in line with the modern standards defining a renewed organization such as efficiency, effectiveness, connectivity and better value for clients and Canadians.

The Office of the Procurement Ombudsman, which reports to the Minister and operates independently, reviews complaints from suppliers. It also reviews procurement practices in departments and agencies, and makes recommendations for the improvement of those practices to ensure fairness, openness and transparency in the procurement process.

3. Strategic outcome and program alignment architecture

PSPC's program alignment architecture (PAA), as approved by the Treasury Board, supports the strategic outcome to deliver high-quality, central programs and services that ensure sound stewardship on behalf of Canadians and meet the program needs of federal institutions. The following lists the programs that comprise PSPC's PAA:

• Acquisitions
• Accommodation management and real property services
• Receiver General for Canada
• Integrity programs and services
• Federal pay and pension administration
• Linguistic management and services
• Specialized programs and services
• Procurement Ombudsman^{Footnote 1}
• Internal services

Part II: The Public Services and Procurement Canada Access to Information and Privacy Program

1. Access to Information and Privacy Directorate structure and responsibilities

The Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) Directorate administers the provisions of the Access to Information Act for PSPC, including one special operating agency, the Translation Bureau, as well as the Office of the Procurement Ombudsman.

In 2015 to 2016, the ATIP Directorate operated with up to 22 ATIP officers, six students and four consultants who worked under five team leaders to manage the requests received within the Department, as well as four senior ATIP policy advisors.

The Director, ATIP, reports to the Director General, Ministerial Services and Access to Information (DG-MSAI), who, in turn, reports to the Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy, Planning and Communications Branch (ADM-PPCB). Reporting to the Director, ATIP, the teams are overseen by the three Managers, ATIP Operations, and the Manager, ATIP Privacy and Policy. The operational units are responsible for processing ATIP requests, consultations, complaints, and court cases; the other unit is responsible for the privacy program as well as ATIP policy, advice, training, monitoring and reporting, and complaint management. The administrative functions are supported by an administrative assistant, an office manager and up to seven support staff members.

The ATIP Directorate is responsible for establishing and directing all activities within PSPC relating to the management of the departmental ATIP program, in accordance with the departmental delegation instruments and the provisions of the Act, Regulations, directives, policies and guidelines.

The administration of the Act by the ATIP Directorate is also facilitated at the branch and regional office levels of PSPC. Each organizational branch has an ATIP liaison officer who coordinates the collection of information and provides guidance to branch managers on the application of the Act, as well as related departmental directives and procedures.

2. Delegation instruments

Under section 3 of the Act, the Minister is designated as the head of the government institution for purposes of the administration of the Act. Pursuant to section 73, the Minister may delegate any of her powers, duties or functions under the Act by signing an order authorizing one or more officers or employees of the institution, who are at the appropriate level, to exercise or perform the powers, duties or functions of the head, specified in the order.

Within PSPC, this delegation instrument is based on a centralized process with the Director and managers of the ATIP Directorate having full delegated authority under the Act. Certain administrative functions are also delegated to the ATIP team leaders to speed up the processing of requests. Full authority under the Act is also delegated to the ADM-PPCB and the DG-MSAI who are responsible for the ATIP program.

An excerpt of the delegation of authorities approved by the former Minister of Public Works and Government Services is provided in Annex A: Delegation of authorities (excerpt).

3. Policies and procedures

3.1 Departmental Policy on Access to Information and Privacy

For the reference of all employees, departmental policies are posted on PSPC's intranet.

The Policy on the Access to Information and Privacy Program (002) outlines the delegation of authority and sets out the definitions, and the roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders within PSPC.

3.2 Access to Information and Privacy liaison officer handbook

The ATIP liaison officer handbook is produced by the ATIP Directorate as a guide to introduce departmental ATIP liaison officers across the Department to the Privacy Act and regulations, to outline the roles and responsibilities of each PSPC ATIP stakeholder, and to provide national processing standards and guidelines for the centralized handling of requests.

3.3 Access to Information and Privacy Directorate desk procedures

The ATIP Directorate has an ATIP officer desk procedures manual in place to standardize the work procedures used by staff, to facilitate the training of new hires and to complement the functionality of the electronic ATIP tracking system.

4. Training

4.1 Departmental employees

Given the complex nature of the Access to Information Act, and the need to balance the public's right to access information with the need to protect the legitimate interests of other parties, the ATIP Directorate provides regular guidance and information sessions.

During the fiscal year, the ATIP Directorate delivered 19 training and awareness sessions to 273 managers and employees at all levels from all branches of the Department.

As well, a section on ATIP is included in the Department's Orientation Program for new employees. This section provides information on employee obligations under the Act, including an explanation of the duty to assist, a reminder that only those delegated under the Act can make disclosure decisions, a reference to procedures for reporting suspected contraventions, as well as a link to the departmental policy on ATIP.

4.2 Access to Information and Privacy Directorate staff

The ATIP officer development program created in 2006 was revised in 2015 to 2016 to update the mandatory training section and to allow for internal deployment of qualified employees at level into the program. The objective of the program is to address the Department's mid and long-term shortage of skilled ATIP professionals by recruiting new employees at the junior level, and preparing them to fill senior ATIP officer positions at the PM-4 group and level up to a five-year horizon. The program is also intended to reduce the costs associated with the competitive staffing process and the use of consultants.

ATIP staff has the opportunity to register and complete certification programs such as the University of Alberta Information Access and Protection of Privacy certification program, take advantage of the ATIP training offered in house and by Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS), and also attend conferences such as the Canadian Access and Privacy Association (CAPA) conference.

Part III: Interpretation and explanation of trends of the statistical report

Statistical reporting on the administration of the Act has been conducted since 1983. Since 2011 to 2012, government institutions have completed more in-depth statistical reporting forms on the administration of the Act as prescribed by the TBS. The 2015 to 2016 statistical report on the Access to Information Act is provided in Annex B: Statistical report on the Access to Information Act.

1. Departmental overview of requests received

The ATIP Directorate processes all requests received by the Department pursuant to the Access to Information Act. Each request is first reviewed for clarity and is then assigned to one or more organizational units of the Department that become responsible for locating and retrieving the records containing the information sought, and identifying any costs or fees for processing the request.

Organizational units review their relevant records and provide recommendations to the ATIP Directorate on any sensitivity related to their disclosure. Where necessary, the ATIP Directorate also undertakes consultations with other organizations and third parties before a skilled ATIP analyst reviews each record to make a decision on disclosure. The ATIP Directorate then notifies the requester and provides access to all of the records that can be disclosed.

The majority of the access to information requests received by the Department during 2015 to 2016 related to the contracting and procurement services provided by PSPC, of which a good number related to the National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy and the new Champlain Bridge project. There was also a significant volume of requests for briefing notes to the Minister and Deputy Minister.

2. Requests under the Access to Information Act

In the 2015 to 2016 fiscal year, the business sector was the highest percentage of users of the Act, generating 29% of the requests received by PSPC. The public represented the second largest source of requests, constituting 27% of those received, whereas the media accounted for 22%. Nineteen percent of the requesters declined to identify and the remaining came from organizations and the academic community. Chart I provides the related details.

Chart I: Access to Information requests received by source

A total of 1083 requests were in progress during this reporting period, which represents a 26% increase in volume compared with the previous fiscal year. Of the 1083 requests in progress, 863 (80%) were new requests, while 220 requests (20%) were outstanding from the previous years. Chart II provides an overview of the trends related to the volume of requests processed by PSPC over the past three fiscal years.

Chart II: Processing trends for access to information requests

3. Requests closed during the reporting period

Of the 1,083 requests in progress, 886 requests (82%) were completed during the 2015 to 2016 reporting period, which represents an 8% increase compared with the previous fiscal year. The remaining 197 requests (18%) were carried forward to the next fiscal year.

In addition to the above-noted workload, PSPC responded to 161 informal requests for records previously released under the Act. This represents an 11% decrease compared with the previous reporting period.

Of the 886 cases completed, information was released either in whole or in part in 657 requests (74%), with more than 215,000 pages reviewed and 135,000 pages released. Chart III provides an overview of the disposition of requests closed by PSPC during the fiscal year.

Chart III: Disposition of access to information requests closed

4. Exemptions and exclusions

Sections 13 through 24 of the Act set out the exemptions intended to protect information pertaining to a particular public or private interest, and section 26 of the Act is an administrative exception relating to the publication of information.

Pursuant to section 68, the Act does not apply to material that is published or available for purchase, library or museum material preserved solely for public record, material deposited with Library and Archives Canada, as well as records considered to be confidences of the Queen's Privy Council of Canada pursuant to section 69 of the Act.

Annex B: Statistical report on the Access to Information Act shows the types of exemptions and exclusions invoked to refuse access. For clarity purposes, if five different exemptions and/or exclusions were used in one request, each relevant section would be reported for a total of five. If the same exemption or exclusion was used several times for the same request, it would be reported only once.

PSPC is the recipient of a considerable amount of commercial, technical and financial information from third parties and, as in past years, the majority of the requests received by the Department were for records containing third party information. While most third party information is of a sensitive nature, PSPC has endeavoured to release as much information as possible, to remain consistent with the spirit of the Act and the severability provisions of its section 25.

As noted in Annex B: Statistical report on the Access to Information Act, personal information [subsection 19(1)], third party information [paragraphs 20(1)(b) and (c)] as well as statutory prohibitions [subsection 24(1)] of the Act accounted for the majority of the exemptions applied by the Department.

In the 2015 to 2016 fiscal year, exclusions were applied pursuant to sections 68 and 69 of the Act on 72 requests or 8% of the total number of cases completed. This represents a 1% increase compared with the previous reporting period.

5. Format of information released

Of the 657 requests in which information was released, the records were provided in the form of paper copies for 312 requests (47%), whereas 345 cases (53%) were in electronic format. There were no cases where access was provided by a combination of copies and in-person examination. It should be noted that the data in this section reflect only requests for which information was all disclosed or disclosed in part.

6. Complexity

PSPC processed over 215,000 pages during the reporting period. This represents an 11% increase compared with the previous fiscal year. While the files contained an average of 320 pages to be processed, 46 of the 886 requests completed (5%) had over 1,000 pages, including 10 with more than 5,000 pages. Chart IV provides the trends related to the relevant pages processed and disclosed by PSPC over the past three fiscal years.

Chart IV: Trends for relevant pages processed and disclosed

In addition to the high volume of records, consultations were required for 363 of the 886 requests completed (41%). Other complexity factors included the assessment of fees, multiple tasking and clarifications of requests, unprecedented cases, as well as the processing and disclosing of electronic records in their original software format.

The consultation process on Cabinet confidences is also complex as detailed schedules must be prepared. In some cases, consultations have been returned to the ATIP Directorate seeking additional information that in turn required further internal and/or external consultations. This contributed to increasing the complexity and processing time. This consultation process took up to 173 days with Legal Services and the Privy Council Office.

7. Processing time

Due to the nature of PSPC's mandate, the records requested often contain commercial and/or government sensitive information. As a result, many of the requests were extended pursuant to paragraphs 9(1)(b) and/or (c) of the Act, in order to undertake the necessary consultations with other government institutions and third parties prior to disclosure. Time extensions under paragraph 9(1)(a) of the Act were also required for requests involving a large number of records.

Of the 886 requests completed during the fiscal year, 404 (46%) needed to be extended in accordance with section 9 of the Act. While on average a 122-day time extension was taken, the average completion time for these requests was 144 days.

Despite the volume and complexity, 459 requests (52%) were completed within the initial 30-day period. The average processing time for all requests completed was 76 days. This is four days less than the previous fiscal year.

Since 2009 to 2010, the Department has strived to maintain a high performance and attained a 94.7% compliance rate in 2015 to 2016 for responding to access to information requests within the legislated timelines.

During the reporting period, 47 requests fell in a deemed refusal status and were closed after the statutory deadline. On average, PSPC needed an additional 191 days to complete these late files.

The ATIP Directorate workload and the external consultations undertaken were the principal reasons for delays in 87% of the 47 late cases. Other factors such as the complexity of requests and the reassignment of files within the ATIP Directorate also contributed to the delays.

The Department's timeliness and compliance continue to be closely monitored and reported to senior management on a weekly basis.

8. Translation

There were no requests for the translation of information from one official language to another.

9. Fees

The Access to Information Act authorizes fees for certain activities related to the processing of formal requests under the Act. In addition to the $5 application fee, other fees may apply for search, preparation and reproduction of the various records, as specified in the Access to Information Regulations.

No fees are imposed for reviewing records or for overhead or shipping. Moreover, in accordance with section 11 of the Act, no fees are charged for the first five hours to search for records or to prepare any part of it for disclosure.

It is the Department's practice to waive fees where (a) the total costs assessed are less than $25 and (b) the legislative time limits have been exceeded by more than six months. Furthermore, since April 2011, when photocopying fees assessed are over $25, the Department provides the records in electronic format, on disc, waiving the related $2 fee. As per the delegation instrument, any decision to waive fees is made by the ATIP team leaders in accordance with the ATIP Directorate fee policy.

The fees collected during this reporting period totalled $5,423, while the fees waived in accordance with subsection 11(6) of the Act were $2,741. Fees collected for this reporting period are estimated to represent less than 1% of the Department's total cost of administering the ATIP program.

An electronic payment system continues to be used to facilitate the payment of fees by debit and credit cards.

10. Consultations from other government institutions and organizations

In addition to ATI requests, the Department received 329 consultations during the reporting period, amounting to 28,642 pages of records to review. Chart V outlines the government institutions that consulted PSPC most frequently in 2015 to 2016.

Chart V: Consultations received by originating institution

A total of 348 consultations were in progress during the reporting period. PSPC responded to 338 consultations, within an average of 23 days. This is comparable to the previous fiscal year. Chart VI provides consultation trends over the last three years.

Chart VI: Processing trends for consultations

11. Complaints and court actions

Table I provides the breakdown of complaints made to the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada (OIC) and of requests for judicial review filed with the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal.

11.1 Complaints to the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada

In 2015 to 2016, the OIC notified the Department that it had received 78 new complaints, 12 of which related to requests received in previous fiscal years. While this represents a significant increase compared with the previous fiscal year, 48 (62%) of the new complaints were made by two requesters.

Of the 78 new complaints, 53 (68%) related to information withheld under the Act, 15 (19%) concerned missing records, 3 (4%) pertained to time extensions taken, and 3 (4%) were about delays. The remaining three complaints were in respect other matters relating to requesting or obtaining access to records under the Act.

In 2015 to 2016, the OIC closed 16 complaints. Of these, seven were well founded, seven were discontinued, and two were not well-founded. A total of 108 complaint investigations were still ongoing at the end of the fiscal year.

Of the seven complaints deemed well founded in 2015 to 2016, four concerned delays in the processing of requests, one concerned the time extension taken to process the requests, one related to missing records, and one pertained to information withheld under the Act. While the valid complaints represent less than one percent of requests closed during the reporting period, PSPC regularly reviews investigative findings to improve its administration of the Access to Information Act.

11.2 Court actions

In 2015 to 2016, one requester filed an application for a judicial review pursuant to section 41 of the Act, and one third party filed two under section 44 of the Act. Below is a summary of these cases:

• Federal Court number T-545-15: Following the not-well founded result of an investigation of a complaint by the Information Commissioner, Mr. William Noonan requested a judicial review of the exemptions applied under sections 19 and 20 of the Act. The information requested pertained to a $4M irrevocable letter of credit submitted by a winning bidder with respect to a proposed building project. Notice of discontinuance filed on November 16, 2015
• Federal Court numbers T-1246-15 and T-1247-15: The Typhon Group Ltd. Requested a judicial review of PSPC's decision to disclose records pertaining to leasing information because of the presence of a disclosure clause. Typhon claims that the documents contain confidential information that must not be disclosed pursuant to section 20 of the Act. On December 14, 2015, the case has been suspended pending the decision in the Calian case (see below)

There was one judicial review carried over from previous fiscal year, as follows:

• Federal Court number T-291-14 and Federal Court of Appeal numbers A-20-16 and A-31-16: Calian Ltd. requested a judicial review of PSPC's decision to release the per diem rates in contract W0046-080001/001TOR (Provision of Research Assistance) based on a disclosure clause contained therein. The hearing took place on June 2, 2015 before Justice Henry Brown of the Federal Court. The Judge granted the application on the basis of the exemptions at paragraphs 20(1)(c) and 20(1)(d) of the Access to Information Act. Notice of Appeal filed on January 13, 2016 against the decision rendered on December 18, 2015

12. Resources related to the Access to Information Act

The total salary costs associated with the Access to Information program amounted to 2,402,143, and operations and maintenance costs to $260,244, for a combined total of 2,662,410. The number of employees and temporary help resources was estimated at 34 for the fiscal year 2015 to 2016.

Annex A: Delegation of authorities (excerpt)

Please note that the November 4, 2011 version has been updated as follows:

Changes to Schedule 1

• Integration of "printing" under goods procurement within department-wide authorities. While printing is currently covered under standing offers which offer specific authorities, integrating printing within the goods procurement will provide additional clarity and flexibility
• Increased limits for the Software Licensing Supply Arrangements (SLSA) from $40,000 to $100,000 upon review of business volumes in collaboration with Acquisitions Branch
• Integration of new travel authorities and revision of hospitality, events and conferences authorities in order to be aligned and compliant with the revised TB Directive on travel, hospitality, conference and event expenditures, effective August 1, 2013
• Integration of a new authority for the Chief Financial Officer to act as the delegated travel and hospitality approval authority in situations where the Deputy Minister participates at the hospitality event or is the traveler
• Modification of the delegations pursuant to the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act in order to reflect the transfer of the mandate for these authorities from the DG, Executive Secretariat to the DG responsible for the ATIP program, and the provision of additional authorities to team leaders
• Amendment to revenue agreement memoranda of understanding and specific services agreements authorities in order to allow incumbents of certain Real Property positions (level 3 and 4) to perform low risk transactions in order to avoid project delays
• Modification of the authority to make changes to the table of equivalent positions in order to allow the Deputy Minister to perform changes to the specific delegation of authorities in accordance with the TB Directive on delegation of financial authorities for disbursements
• Addition or change to the "table of equivalent positions" and "specific delegation of authorities" tables to reflect the current organizational structures

Minister's and Deputy Minister's delegation of authorities

We hereby delegate the powers vested in the offices of the Minister and Deputy Minister of Public Works and Government Services, in the manner defined in Schedules 1 to 4, the associated tables of equivalent positions and specific delegations in the notes to these schedules, including officers appointed on a temporary or acting basis to positions so defined, subject to the principles, guidelines, limitations and restrictions described in the department's delegation of authorities manual and all relevant legislation, regulations and policies.

Specifically, this instrument is intended to delegate authority, as defined by:

Schedule 1

"Department-wide authorities", the "table of equivalent positions" for Schedule 1 and the specific delegations contained in the "notes to Schedule 1"

Schedule 2

"Real Property authorities", the "table of equivalent positions" for Schedule 2 and the specific delegations contained in the "notes to Schedule 2"

Schedule 3

"Common service acquisition authorities", the "table of equivalent positions" for Schedule 3 and the specific delegations contained in the "notes to Schedule 3"

Schedule 4

"Receiver General for Canada authorities"

Further, these delegations are made on the explicit understanding that they are to be used only to:

• commensurate with the level of responsibility assigned to the position and when required to undertake the duties of that position as described in the operational plans of the Department
• attain departmental objectives, within the departmental mandate
• attain clients' objectives when providing common services to client departments

The department's delegation of authorities manual documents the delegated authorities of Public Works and Government Services Canada and includes important information on the conditions under which we have made these delegations. All officers of the Department who are acting on our behalf in any matter related to these delegations must make themselves familiar with the contents of the manual to ensure that they are fully cognizant of the conditions and implications of doing so.