Annual Report to Parliament on the Administration of the Access to Information Act

Introduction

The Administrative Tribunals Support Service of Canada (ATSSC) is pleased to present to Parliament its annual report on the administration of the Access to Information Act (the Act) for fiscal year April 1, 2020 to March 31, 2021.

Pursuant to section 94 of the Access to Information Act and section 20 of the Service Fees Act, this 2020-2021 Annual Report on the Administration of the “Access to Information Act” has been prepared for tabling in the House of Commons and the Senate. This Report provides an analysis of the information contained in the ATSSC's Statistical Report on the “Access to Information Act”. In addition, it reports on emerging trends, training activities, complaints, and monitoring with respect to the ATSSC's administration of the Act.

The purpose of the Access to Information Act is to provide a right of access to information in records under the control of a government institution. It maintains that government information should be available to the public, that necessary exceptions to the right of access should be limited and specific, and that decisions on the disclosure of government information should be reviewed independently of government.

The Act is intended to complement and not replace existing procedures for access to records and is not intended to limit in any way access to the information that is normally available to the public.

The ATSSC is fully committed to both the spirit and the intent of the Act to foster a culture of openness and transparency within the organization.

ATSSC Mandate

The Administrative Tribunals Support Service of Canada (ATSSC) was established with the coming into force on November 1, 2014, of the Administrative Tribunals Support Service of Canada Act. The ATSSC is responsible for providing support services and facilities to 11 federal administrative tribunals by way of a single, integrated organization. Additionally, the ATSSC provides facilities and administrative support to the National Joint Council and supports the Environmental Protection Tribunal of Canada through a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Environment and Climate Change Canada.

These services include the specialized services required to support the mandate of each tribunal (e.g., registry, research and analysis, legal and other mandate or case activities), as well as internal services (e.g., human resources, financial services, information management and technology, accommodation, security, planning and communications). Through these specialized services, the ATSSC supports improving access to justice for Canadians.

The Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada is responsible for the ATSSC.

The administrative tribunals supported by the ATSSC include:

Canada Agricultural Review Tribunal (CART)

The CART is an independent, quasi-judicial tribunal that reviews agricultural and agri- food administrative monetary penalties issued to persons who have allegedly contravened federal rules pertaining to: the import of animal and plant products; the humane transport of livestock; the use of pesticides; or the inspection of plants, animals and meats.

Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB)

The CIRB promotes constructive labour-management relations in the federally regulated private sector by overseeing the acquisition and termination of bargaining rights; resolving unfair labour practice complaints through mediation or adjudication; and assuring the continuity of services necessary to protect public health and safety in the event of a labour dispute. Also administers the Status of the Artist Act.

Canadian Cultural Property Export Review Board (CCPERB)

The CCPERB is an independent decision-making body that reports to the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages. CCPERB determines whether cultural property is of outstanding significance and national importance with a view to protecting and preserving our artistic, historic, and scientific heritage in Canada and making it accessible to the public.

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT)

The CHRT is an independent, quasi-judicial tribunal that inquires into allegations of prohibited discrimination under the Canadian Human Rights Act. The CHRT determines whether a discriminatory practice has occurred in respect of employment, or the provision of goods, services, facilities and / or accommodation. The CHRT dismisses the matter if without merit, or if the complaint is substantiated, it may provide remedial relief to the victim.

Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT)

The CITT is a quasi-judicial body that provides Canadian and international businesses with access to fair, transparent and timely trade remedy inquiries, federal government procurement inquiries, and customs and excise tax appeals. At the request of the Government, the Tribunal provides advice in economic and tariff matters.

Competition Tribunal (CT)

The CT is an independent specialized tribunal that combines expertise in economics and business with expertise in law. The cases it hears deal with matters such as business mergers; abuse of dominant position; agreements between competitors; refusal to comply; price maintenance; other restrictive trade practices; deceptive marketing practices; specialization agreements; delivered pricing; foreign judgments, law and directives that adversely affect economic activity in Canada; and refusals to supply by foreign suppliers.

Federal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board (FPSLREB)

The FPSLREB is an independent quasi-judicial statutory tribunal established by the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board Act. The FPSLREB is responsible for administering the collective bargaining and grievance adjudication systems in the federal public service and in Parliament. It is also responsible for the resolution of staffing complaints related to internal appointments and layoffs in the federal public service. It can also receive complaints about appointments that were made to comply with an order in a previous FPSLREB decision, as well as revocations of internal appointments.

Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal (PSDPT)

The PSDPT was established to enhance public confidence in the integrity of public servants. Its mandate is to hear reprisal complaints referred by the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner. The Tribunal can grant remedies in favor of complainants and order disciplinary action against persons who take reprisals.

The Tribunal's mission is to contribute to the enhancement of an ethical culture in the public service through the impartial and timely disposition of cases.

Social Security Tribunal of Canada (SST)

The SST is an independent administrative tribunal that makes quasi-judicial decisions on appeals related to the Employment Insurance Act, the Canada Pension Plan, and the Old Age Security Act.

Specific Claims Tribunal Canada (SCT)

The SCT is an independent tribunal established under the Specific Claims Tribunal Act to adjudicate First Nations’ grievances against the Crown. The Tribunal has the express mandate of deciding specific claims including claims related to the non-fulfilment of treaties, fraud, illegal leases and dispositions, and inadequate compensation for reserve lands or other assets. The purpose of the Specific Claims Tribunal Act is to resolve outstanding grievances and to encourage reconciliation between First Nations and the Crown.

Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada (TATC)

The Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada provides a recourse mechanism to the national transportation sector regarding administrative actions taken by the Minister of Transport and the Canadian Transportation Agency under various pieces of federal transportation legislation. The Tribunal holds review and appeal hearings at the request of those affected by these administrative decisions.

Environmental Protection Tribunal of Canada (EPTC)

The EPTC is an independent, quasi-judicial tribunal that carries out review hearings of Administrative Monetary Penalties and Compliance Orders issued by Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) enforcement officers. The EPTC is independent from ECCC and was formerly known as Environmental Protection Review Canada.

National Joint Council

The NJC is the forum for co-development, consultation and information sharing between the government as employer and public service bargaining agents.

Organizational Structure

The Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) Office is responsible for administering the Access to Information Act (the Act) on behalf of the ATSSC. Its mandate is to ensure compliance with the legislation, regulations and government policy and to create organizational standards and directives relating to the Act. Responsibility for the powers, duties and functions for the administration of the Act has been formally established and is outlined in the Delegation Order for the purpose of the Access to Information Act and Access to Information Regulations signed by the ATSSC Chief Administrator. The Director General, Corporate Services Branch, the Director, Planning and Communications and the ATIP Manager have been delegated authorities as described in the Delegation Order included in Appendix A.

Within the ATSSC’s organizational structure, the ATIP Office reports to the Planning and Communications Unit which is part of the Corporate Services Branch. Oversight of the ATIP Office is administered by the Director, Planning and Communications. The ATIP Office consists of the manager and two analysts, as well as support services of an ATIP consultant dedicated to access to information and privacy activities.

The ATIP Office receives, coordinates and processes requests in accordance with the Act, promotes awareness of the Act within the organization, fulfills reporting responsibilities relating to the Act. The ATIP office also provides expert advice and guidance to senior management and ATSSC staff on matters relating to the Act.

The ATSSC has not entered into any service agreements under section 96 of the Access to Information Act during this reporting period.

Performance for 2020-2021

The ATSSC received a total of 85 formal requests under the Act. With four requests carried over from last fiscal year, 83 of the 89 active requests were completed. Six requests were carried forward into the new fiscal year.

The ATSSC responded to 78 formal access to information requests within the legislated timelines which represents 94% of the 89 requests received in 2020-2021 or carried forward from previous fiscal years.

Since its creation in November 2014, the number of formal requests received have remained stable from one reporting period to the next. Exceptionally, formal requests received during this reporting period have increased more than two-fold from its previous reporting period (Figure 1). This is likely due to the increasing awareness of the ATSSC as an institution as well as the implementation of the Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) Online Request Service (AORS) in 2018-2019.

Figure 1: Requests Received

Consultations

In addition to processing its own requests, the ATIP Office also provides recommendations to other institutions regarding the release of records that concern the ATSSC. This reporting period, the ATSSC received 17 consultation requests from other federal institutions. Of the 16 requests completed, full disclosure of the records was recommended in 15 cases and a partial release in one case.

Consultation requests received from other federal institutions have fluctuated from one reporting period to the next with no apparent pattern (Figure 1). However, the ATIP Office has noted that the ATSSC received the lowest number of consultation requests for this reporting period in comparison to previous reporting periods.

Informal Requests

Requests can be made for records previously disclosed under the Act, which are referred to as “Informal Requests”. Summaries of previously disclosed requests are published monthly on the OpenGovernment website, as part of the Government of Canada’s commitment to openness and transparency. The ATSSC received five informal requests during this reporting period. The last two consecutive reporting periods have shown (Figure 1) the lowest number of informal requests received by the ATSSC since it was created.

Sources of Requests

Of the 85 requests that were received this reporting period, 67 requests were submitted by the public and four requests were submitted by the media. Requests were also received from businesses (10) and organizations (four). No requests were submitted by academia and no applicants declined to identify.

Figure 2: Sources of Requests

Disposition of Completed Requests

During this reporting period, the ATSSC completed 83 requests under the Act, 12 (equivalent to 14%) of which resulted in a full release and five (equivalent to 6%) in a partial release of the information sought. None of the information sought was withheld entirely. Two requests were transferred.

Other requests that did not result in the disclosure of records were as follows:

No Records Exist

Sixty-one (61) requests could not be processed because relevant records under the control of the ATSSC did not exist. Where possible, applicants were advised of other government institutions that may have records and were provided with contact information accordingly.

Request Abandoned

Three requests were abandoned by applicants. In most abandoned cases, clarification is needed from the applicants to process their requests. When the applicants do not provide clarification, the requests are deemed as abandoned. In other cases, the applicants choose to abandon their requests.

Exemptions Invoked

The Access to Information Act sets out specific exceptions to the right of access known as exemptions. Each exemption is intended to protect information relating to a particular public or private interest and form the only basis for refusing access to government information under the Act. Of the 83 requests completed, exemptions to withhold information were invoked in eight cases. The most frequently applied exemption was subsection 19(1) (records containing personal information) and 20(1)(c) (records containing third party information).

Extensions and Completion Time

Requests can be extended beyond the 30-day statutory time frame in three circumstances:

• the request is for a large number of records or necessitates a search through a large number of records (paragraph 9(1)(a) of the Act)
• consultations are necessary (paragraph 9(1)(b) of the Act)
• the request requires giving notice to a third party (paragraph 9(1)(c) of the Act)

During this reporting period, an extension under paragraph 9(1)(a) of the Act was taken in one (1) case because the request was for a large number of records or meeting the original time limit would have unreasonably interfered with the operations of the ATSSC. No extensions were taken under paragraph 9(1)(b) for the purpose of consulting within the ATSSC and/or with other institutions. Additionally, an extension under paragraph 9(1)(c) was taken in one (one) case as consultations with third parties were required.

The ATSSC responded to 60 requests within one to 15 days, 15 requests within 16 to 30 days, and four requests within 31 to 60 days. Two requests required 61 to 120 days to complete, no requests required 121 to 180 days and two requests required 181 to 365 days to complete. Of the 83 requests completed during this reporting period, 78 were completed within the statutory time frame.

Impact of COVID-19 on ATIP Operations

ATSSC’s ATIP Office has been equipped for virtual operations since 2019, with analysts able to work remotely. While the ATSSC is equipped with an electronic records repository, the retrieval of records in response to requests has been challenged by COVID-19. Not all the records have been digitized and stored in an accessible repository and not all administrative tribunals are equipped with e-Registry services. A total of six requests were affected during this reporting period due to these pandemic- related challenges.

Fees

The Service Fees Act requires a responsible authority to report annually to Parliament on the fees collected by the institution.

With respect to fees collected under the Access to Information Act, the information below (Figure 3) is reported in accordance with the requirements of section 20 of the Service Fees Act.

As per the Interim Directive on the Administration of the “Access to Information Act”, issued on May 5, 2016, and the changes to the Access to Information Act that came into force on June 21, 2019, the ATSSC waives all fees prescribed by the Act and Regulations, other than the $5 application fee set out in paragraph 7(1)(a) of the Regulations.

Figure 3 is a summary of the financial information for all Access to Information Act fees under the organization’s authority.

Training and Awareness

To increase the knowledge and understanding of the Act across the ATSSC, training and awareness sessions were delivered by the ATIP Office. In particular, the ATIP Office provided an awareness session relating to the requirements of Part II – proactive publications, of the Access to Information Act. Approximately 20 individuals participated in this information activity.

Ongoing training occurred on an ad-hoc basis with our liaison officers. The liaison officers assist the ATIP Office in producing the requested records and providing insight into the subject matter of the requests.

Policies, Guidelines and Procedures

The ATSSC is guided by the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS) suite of access to information policy and guidance instruments. During this reporting period, the ATSSC did not implement any new or revised institution-specific policies, guidelines or procedures.

Complaints

This reporting period, four new complaints were filed with the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada (OIC) against the ATSSC regarding the processing of access to information requests. In all four instances, the complainants claimed that the ATSSC had failed to conduct a reasonable search for records in response to the requests made under the Access to Information Act.

The OIC did not complete any investigation into existing complaints against the ATSSC.

Monitoring

The monitoring of access to information requests was conducted through the case management system containing all relevant and necessary information to ensure compliance with the legislated requirements and reporting obligations. The system was updated as new requests were received or the status of a file was changed. Weekly meetings between the ATIP Manager and the ATIP analysts as well as meetings between the ATIP Manager and the Director, Planning and Communications to discuss workload and priorities also assisted the ATSSC in meeting its statutory obligations.

Appendix A

Schedule

Powers, duties and functions delegated pursuant to subsection 95(1) of the Access to Information Act and the Access to Information Regulations

Legend:

CA

Chief Administrator

DG

Director General, Corporate Services

D

Director, Planning and Communications

M

Manager, Access to Information and Privacy

Appendix B

Access to Information Act
Statistical Report

Name of institution: Administrative Tribunals Support Service of Canada

Reporting period: 4/1/2020 to 3/31/2021

Section 6: Consultations Received From Other Institutions and Organizations

Section 7: Completion Time of Consultations on Cabinet Confidences

Section 8: Complaints and investigations

Note: Enter values to three decimal places.

Supplemental Statistical Report on the Access to Information Act and Privacy Act

Name of institution: Administrative Tribunals Support Service of Canada

Reporting period: 2020-04-01 to 2021-03-31

Section 1: Capacity to Receive Requests

Enter the number of weeks your institution was able to receive ATIP requests through the different channels.

Section 2: Capacity to Process Records

2.1 Enter the number of weeks your institution was able to process paper records in different classification levels.

2.2 Enter the number of weeks your institution was able to process electronic records in different classification levels.