Transparency and Access to Information (ATI)

Access to information (ATI)

National Defence is committed to upholding accountability and transparency.
We are a large team with a complex mandate and our work generates significant public attention – as it should.
Last fiscal year, National Defence closed 2,242 ATI requests – a 4 percent increase over the previous year and the fourth consecutive year of increases in the number of requests closed.
Over half of these requests were completed within 30 days.
However, the Defence Team is always committed to improving, including in looking for ways in which we can more effectively and efficiently fulfil our obligations.
In fact, we continue to strengthen the processes, tools, and training products we use to respond to requests made under the Access to Information Act.
For example, to deepen commitment at the leadership level, senior leaders have signed letters of agreement acknowledging their obligations under the Access to Information Act.
This includes reinforcing the commitments of our senior leaders to ensure that the Act is complied with.
We are also moving to a paperless ATIP process to the greatest extent possible, to improve file management at the working level.
National Defence also proactively discloses key information online in accordance with our obligations under the Access to Information Act, including information on contracts, travel and hospitality expenses, and reports tabled in Parliament.
Access to Information is a right for all Canadians and we will continue to uphold it as a priority at National Defence.

If pressed on "No Records Exist" answers:

National Defence does not willfully withhold or destroy records in our possession.
A "No Records Exist" response may stem from a number of situations.
For example, the retention period for a document has passed or the information is not tracked by the department.

If pressed on ATIP requesting wait times for military housing:

National Defence does not track wait times for military housing, although we do maintain wait list information by site.
I understand that the Department has recently provided the Committee with a breakdown of wait lists for military housing on Canadian Armed Forces bases and wings.
National Defence regularly reviews our processes to ensure that we are applying ATI policy appropriately.

Key Facts

Overview

The Access to Information Act (ATIA) provides Canadian citizens, permanent residents, individuals, and corporations present in Canada a right to access records under the control of government institutions.
An institution subject to the ATIA has 30 calendar days to reply to a request and give written notice as to whether access to the record requested will be provided.

Statistics

In FY 2022-23, National Defence:
- Received 2,241 new ATI requests, an 11% decrease from the previous reporting period;
- Closed 2,242 ATI requests, a 4% increase over the previous reporting period and the fourth consecutive increase;
- Provided a "no records exist" answer to 593 (26%) out of a total of 2,242 records that it closed.
On October 17, 2023, all government departments and agencies, including National Defence, tabled their annual ATIP reports in Parliament.

Details

No Records Exist Responses

A "No Records Exist" response to an Access to Information request may result from several different situations:
- The information was contained in a record which has passed the retention period and is no longer available within the department: either having been disposed of, or transferred to Library and Archives Canada in accordance with the disposition schedule;
- The information requested was transitory in nature and was disposed of when no longer required in compliance with information management, security, privacy and legal requirements and procedures.
- The information requested may be something that is not tracked by the department.

Delays

In FY 2022-23, National Defence responded to 61.73% of requests within legislated timelines. Interference with Operations/Workload was cited for 46.9% of requests closed late during the reporting period.
National Defence also noted in its FY 2022-23 Annual Report that a number of factors beyond the control of the ATIP office continued to impact performance and deemed refusal rates.
This included increased media attention and public interest relating to priorities such as Sexual Misconduct and class action lawsuits, which affect Offices' of Primary Interest (OPI) ability to retrieve records. Timely review by the ATIP office is further impacted by the complexities inherent in this sensitive and complex information.
Notable recent improvements at National Defence to address ATI delays include:
- The implementation of letters of agreement between the Deputy Minister and L1s acknowledging their obligations regarding the AITA and the Privacy Act (PA);
- The implementation of reference tools to support tasking liaison officers;
- Integrating access to information objectives into performance where relevant; and,
- During FY-22-23, National Defence made mandatory the Canada School of Public Service's ATIP Fundamentals and the ATIP Directorate's ATIP 101 for all Department of National Defence managers, and all Canadian Armed Forces managers supervising civilians.
We are in the process of procuring new software that is expected to make processing files more efficient and expect to realize some benefits in the next 12-18 months, with full implementation by 2026.
The new software will improve basic administration of files by combining case management and file processing software, automating some tasks, which will enable improved analysis while decreasing administrative burden.
We are continuing to investigate other avenues to improve compliance, including technological solutions which can speed up the search for, and collection of information.

ETHI Report on Canada's ATI System

On June 20, 2023, the House of Commons Committee on Ethics released its report on The State of Canada's Access to Information System.
Recommendation 7 stipulated that "the Government of Canada explore the possibility of creating an expedited access to information system as part of the access to information regime for victims and survivors of military misconduct."
On October 17, 2023, Treasury Board Secretariat tabled the Government Response to this report in the House of Commons.
In response to Recommendation 7, the Government Response notes that National Defence is exploring ways to expedite access to these records through new or existing mechanisms and processes, such as by modernizing and streamlining the conflict and complaint resolution process (see Modernizing the CAF Grievance Process).

Access to Information Backlogs and Delays

National Defence is working hard to address Access to Information (ATI) backlogs, and we are taking a multidisciplinary approach.
A common challenge across Government causing delays is the shortage of experienced ATIP analysts.
To help resolve this challenge in the long-term, National Defence is establishing an in-house development program to help with both recruitment and retention.
We are also looking at technological solutions to make search and retrieval of information more effective and efficient.
For instance, we are in the process of procuring new software that is expected to make processing files more efficient and expect to realize some benefits in the next 12-18 months, with full implementation by 2026.
We remain committed to examining and taking all possible measures to reduce backlogs and delays, so that Canadians receive information as swiftly as possible.

Key Facts

Staffing & Training

As of October 2023, there were 67 employees working on ATI requests, consisting of 50 full time, 3 part time, and 14 consultants and agency personnel.
This number fluctuates due to frequent transfers of analysts between departments.
To supplement our ATI workforce, which is routinely facing a 40-50% shortage in Full Time Equivalents (FTEs), National Defence is looking at options for recruiting classes of new analysts that can be trained from the ground up.
National Defence offers ongoing ATIP training to all Defence employees, and recently added updated, virtual on-demand training to make it more accessible to the entire Defence team.
To further assist with retention, National Defence is developing a new professional development program for members of the Directorate of Access to Information and Privacy (DAIP) team to further enhance their skills and offering second language training to enable career advancement.

Other Improvements

Notable recent improvements at National Defence to address ATI delays include:
- The implementation of letters of agreement between the Deputy Minister and L1s acknowledging their obligations regarding the Access to Information Act (AITA) and the Privacy Act (PA);
- The implementation of reference tools to support tasking liaison officers;
- Integrating access to information objectives into performance where relevant; and,
- During FY-22-23, National Defence made mandatory the Canada School of Public Service’s ATIP Fundamentals and the ATIP Directorate’s ATIP 101 for all Department of National Defence managers, and all Canadian Armed Forces managers supervising civilians.

Details

Delays

In FY 2022-23, National Defence responded to 61.73% of requests within legislated timelines. Interference with Operations/Workload was cited for 46.9% of requests closed late during the reporting period.
National Defence also noted in its FY 2022-23 Annual Report that a number of factors beyond the control of the ATIP office continued to impact performance and deemed refusal rates.
This included increased media attention and public interest relating to priorities such as Sexual Misconduct and class action lawsuits, which affect Offices’ of Primary Interest (OPI) ability to retrieve records. Timely review by the ATIP office is further impacted by the complexities inherent in this sensitive and complex information.
We are in the process of procuring new software that is expected to make processing files more efficient.
The new software will improve basic administration of files by combining case management and file processing software, automating some tasks, and freeing up valuable resources to use their skills in the analysis of files.
We are continuing to investigate other avenues to improve compliance, including technological solutions which can speed up the search for, and collection of information.

ATI on Canadian Surface Combatant

Providing Canadians with access to government records is a cornerstone of transparency and accountability, and a pillar of Canada’s democracy.
National Defence recently provided a response to an Access to Information Request regarding the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC).
This request was for over 10 years of information related to the military shipbuilding umbrella agreement.
Department officials searched through a large volume of records to locate the relevant information, efforts which took nine months to complete.
The requested information contained records obtained from Irving Shipbuilding, and as such, required consultation with them to determine if the records contained proprietary information.
In response to our consultation, Irving Shipbuilding identified information that qualified for exemption under the Access to Information Act and the Defence Production Act.
This led National Defence to release nearly 1,700 pages of information in response to this ATI, some of which contained redactions to accommodate the exemptions requested by Irving Shipbuilding.
National Defence always endeavours to comply with all applicable Access to Information policies and guidelines to ensure that Canadians have access to the information they are entitled to, while also respecting our agreements with third parties.

If pressed on lack of transparency on CSC project costs:

National Defence is committed to upholding departmental accountability and transparency.
We do publish the costs of procurement projects on our website.
Once the ongoing review of the revised proposal for the CSC is complete, we will provide an update.

If pressed on transparency in the procurement process:

National Defence has put in place a number of measures to ensure legislative and policy requirements are met with respect to transparency in contracting.
For instance, we have developed a comprehensive manual on procurement and contracting to ensure that transparency principles are met.
Further, we have established a contracting compliance framework to verify our practices.
We also have a series of training courses that support procurement and contracting delegations of authority, and the maintenance of systems of record to ensure proactive disclosure requirements are met.
National Defence continually seeks to improve its capabilities in proactive disclosure, and has been actively responding to recommendations that stem from reviews on procurement practices in general.

Key Facts

Canadian Surface Combatant Project

Project costs continue to be refined and updated as the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) project matures, the associated ship support elements are better understood, and as the shipyard provides updated cost estimates for CSC ship construction.
Currently, the project cost estimate remains $56-60 billion (before taxes).
The current estimated project value includes all components required to design, build, and bring these ships into service, including infrastructure, weapons, and project management costs, and is not just the acquisition cost for the ships themselves.
A full assessment of the estimates and potential budget impact will be conducted over several months and will provide essential information to enable a proper update to the project cost estimate, in advance of the CSC project seeking the necessary authorities to proceed into Implementation.
While the Department of National Defence has not yet reconciled all information necessary to assess the potential change to the project cost estimate, there are indications that an increase to the project cost estimate is likely.
Completion of essential design work is scheduled to support the start of low-rate production activities on the first CSC in mid-2024, with full rate production expected to begin in 2025. Design work on the more complex sections of the ship will continue in parallel to the start of construction.
Delivery of the first ship is expected in the early 2030s. We are working closely with our industry partners to find efficiencies to accelerate build and delivery timelines.

Disclosure of Wrongdoing Process (Whistleblowing)

We are dedicated to ensuring that National Defence is a safe workplace for all its members, and that our disclosure process is clear and transparent.
To this end, we recognize the importance of addressing instances of wrongdoing in order to maintain the public’s confidence in the integrity of our organization and our members.
- Department of National Defence (DND) public servants can submit a disclosure of wrongdoing under the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act (PSDPA).
- CAF members can submit a disclosure using the Canadian Armed Forces Disclosure Process (CAF DP).
Both processes are managed and overseen by Assistant Deputy Minister (Review Services) on behalf of the Deputy Minister and the Chief of the Defence Staff.
ADM(RS) has established the Internal Disclosure Office (IDO) to ensure there is impartial day-to-day management of the disclosure of wrongdoings.
1. The process begins when a DND employee or CAF member makes a disclosure of wrongdoing to the Internal Disclosure Office (IDO).
2. The IDO then conducts a preliminary assessment and determines if the allegation falls under its mandate and whether there is sufficient evidence to conduct an investigation.
3. If an investigation is warranted, one is conducted; if not, the discloser is advised with an explanation – and may be referred to other available recourse mechanisms.
4. In situations where an investigation is conducted, a determination is made if founded wrongdoing did or did not occur. In either situation, all individuals that are implicated are informed of the outcome.
5. Cases of founded wrongdoing are published on Defence Team internal and external websites to the fullest extent possible (i.e. while respecting the privacy and confidentiality of everyone involved).
This recognizes that it is equally critical that founded cases of wrongdoing be disclosed to the public in a timely manner, to ensure transparency and public accountability.
Section 11(1)(c) of the PSDPA requires that, if wrongdoing is confirmed following a disclosure made to a supervisor or senior officer, chief executives must promptly provide public access to information that describes the wrongdoing, as well as any corrective action taken by the chief executive in relation to the wrongdoing.

If pressed on reforms to the Disclosure of Wrongdoing Process:

We welcome and accept the recommendations made by the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner in their September 2023 report and are committed to improving the timelines for public reporting.
I am pleased to report that progress has been made through the development of administrative tools to improve notification processes and establishing more focused tracking and reporting.
National Defence will provide an update to the Commissioner in March 2024 on our plan and ongoing work to implement the recommendations.
This and ongoing work will advance efforts to foster a more transparent environment, where all employees feel confident in coming forward with cases of wrongdoing.

If pressed on Op IMPACT training:

We take all incidents regarding compliance with the Law of Armed Conflict seriously and take proper and thorough actions to address any issues that arise.
The Canadian Forces National Investigation Service investigated the alleged incident and found no evidence of negligent performance of duties, inappropriate conduct, nor other offences by Canadian Armed Forces members.
However, we appreciate that our military members work in challenging conditions.
That is why, to ensure that members are clear on their obligations, the Canadian Armed Forces has codified the existing responsibilities of its members in a Task Force Standing Order.
This Standing Order provides guidance on what must be reported and to whom, and all members joining Op IMPACT or other missions in the Middle East are required to review and sign off on it.
I also want to highlight that respect for the rule of law is incorporated in the training we provide to foreign forces, including the Iraqi Security Forces.
We have further tailored our training for our members and our partner forces, as part of our effort to routinely adjust training to better suit the Government’s needs and adapt to best practices.

Key Facts

If an employee of the Department of National Defence or a member of the Canadian Armed Forces becomes aware of wrongdoing, he or she has a responsibility to report that wrongdoing under the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act (PSDPA) or the Canadian Forces Disclosure Process.
The PSDPA gives federal public sector employees and others a secure and confidential process for disclosing serious wrongdoing in the workplace, as well as protection from acts of reprisal.
- Section 11(c) of the Act requires that founded disclosures of wrongdoing be released as public information.
- Section 19 of the Act protects employees from reprisals.
- Section 52 of the Act requires that the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF), the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) and the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) establish their own procedures for the disclosure of wrongdoing, comparable to those established under the PSDPA.
On 1 April 2013, the CAF Disclosure Process came into force. CAF members may make a disclosure of wrongdoing under this process, which provides the same rights and protections that are afforded to public servants under the PSDPA.
The term “whistleblowing” refers to the act of calling attention to a questionable or illicit activity in an attempt to have it brought to an end. Within National Defence, the term whistleblowing is referred to as a “disclosure of wrongdoing.” Under the PSDPA, wrongdoing can include:
- A contravention of any Act of Parliament;
- A misuse of public funds;
- A gross mismanagement;
- An act or omission that creates a substantial and specific danger to the life, health or safety of persons, or to the environment;
- A serious breach of a code of conduct; and
- Knowingly directing or counselling a person to commit wrongdoing.
The PSDPA is not intended to address matters of a personal nature, such as individual harassment complaints or individual workplace grievances. These matters should continue to be addressed through procedures available to deal with such concerns.

Details

Public Service Integrity Commissioner Report

In July 2020, the Office of the Public Service Integrity Commissioner (PSIC) received a disclosure alleging that senior managers did not provide prompt public access to a founded case of wrongdoing in the CAF.
As a result of this disclosure, in October 2020, the Commissioner launched an investigation into whether National Defence committed “gross mismanagement,” pursuant to paragraph 8(c) of the Act.
In February 2021, the PSIC received a second disclosure of wrongdoing alleging that National Defence had not advised a discloser of the outcome of an investigation that had been submitted four years earlier.
The investigation was also further expanded in February 2021 to determine whether National Defence committed gross mismanagement by failing to promptly make information public about founded cases of wrongdoing at DND and in the CAF.
Following the conclusion of the investigation, the Commissioner tabled a report on September 19, 2023, in which he concluded that there is a pattern of cases of wrongdoing not being published, and in some cases, of disclosers not being informed of the outcome of internal investigations in a timely manner.
The report outlines that between 2015 and 2020, there were three founded cases of wrongdoing at National Defence that were not made public until 2021 and 2022.
By failing to provide prompt public access to information related to cases of wrongdoing, the Commissioner concluded that National Defence committed wrongdoing pursuant to paragraphs 8(a) and 8(c) of the PSDPA.

Report Recommendations

The report recommended that:
- National Defence establish a training or orientation process for all employees involved in the administration of the PSDPA, including senior managers, to ensure they have knowledge of the Act and are committed to its application.
- National Defence implement a cyclical audit of the internal disclosure program to verify the number of disclosures, investigations launched and founded cases of wrongdoing, and to ensure that prompt publication of accurate information has occurred.
- National Defence undertakes a yearly evaluation of their internal disclosure process for a minimum of three years, for the purpose of ensuring that the Deputy Minister is satisfied that the program is being effectively managed.
National Defence accepted all three recommendations contained in the report and committed to working with the Commissioner’s Office toward their implementation. National Defence will provide an update to the Commissioner in March 2024 on its plan and ongoing work to implement the recommendations.

Public Service Integrity Commissioner Report

We are dedicated to ensuring that National Defence is a safe workplace for all its members, and that its disclosure process is clear and transparent.
I thank the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner for his important work and can advise that National Defence has accepted all recommendations.
Implementation efforts have started for all three recommendations and National Defence will be providing a detailed update to the Public Sector Integrity Commission in March 2024.
We are committed to improving timelines for closing investigations and have already made progress by introducing more focused tracking and reporting.
This and ongoing work will advance efforts to foster an environment where employees feel confident in coming forward with cases of wrongdoing.

Key Facts

The Public Sector Integrity Commissioner (PSIC) has completed an investigation into a disclosure of wrongdoing at National Defence.
In a report tabled to the House of Commons on 19 September 2023, the Commissioner concluded that there is a pattern of cases of wrongdoing not being published, and in some cases, disclosers not being informed of the outcome of internal investigations in a timely manner.
By failing to provide prompt public access to information related to cases of wrongdoing in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF), the Commissioner concludes that National Defence committed wrongdoing pursuant to paragraphs 8(a) and 8(c) of the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act.
PSIC has made three recommendations in the report, one focused on training and two recommending regular audits and evaluations, all of which have been accepted by National Defence.

Details

The Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act (PSDPA)

Under the PSDPA, Departments are required to establish an internal disclosure process to receive and deal with allegations of wrongdoing.
Assistant Deputy Minister (Review Services) manages and oversees the internal disclosure process on behalf of the Deputy Minister and Chief of the Defence Staff.
Military members are excluded from the PSDPA. However, the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) Disclosure Process is a parallel process that allows CAF member to submit allegations of wrongdoing to ADM (Review Services).

Public Service Integrity Commissioner (PSIC) Report

The report stems from a disclosure received by PSIC in July 2020, alleging that National Defence senior managers did not provide prompt public access to a founded case of wrongdoing in the CAF.
In February 2021, the PSIC received a second disclosure of wrongdoing alleging that National Defence had not advised a discloser of the outcome of an investigation that had been submitted four years earlier.
PSIC expanded their investigation to three founded cases between 2015 and 2020 which concerned National Defence and the CAF.
Each case had delays from the date of the final report to formal public notice ranging from 18 months to 43 months.

Report Recommendations

The report recommends that:
- National Defence establish a training or orientation process for all employees involved in the administration of the PSDPA, including senior managers, to ensure they have knowledge of the Act and are committed to its application.
- National Defence implement a cyclical audit of the internal disclosure program to verify the number of disclosures, investigations launched and founded cases of wrongdoing, and to ensure that prompt publication of accurate information has occurred.
- National Defence undertake a yearly evaluation of their internal disclosure process for a minimum of three years, for the purpose of ensuring that the Deputy Minister is satisfied that the program is being effectively managed.

National Defence Ombudsman

We are dedicated to ensuring that National Defence provides a safe and inclusive workplace for all its members.
That is why I am committed to supporting the important work of the Ombudsman to investigate complaints and promote long-lasting improvements to the Defence community.
I continue to maintain a regular dialogue with the Ombudsman, and I deeply value the important services that the Ombudsman’s Office provides to the Defence Team.

If pressed on independence of the Ombudsman:

The administrative arrangement of the Ombudsman’s office does not affect his ability to conduct independent investigations.
We look forward to the Ombudsman’s continued support in making improvements that benefit all members of the Defence Team.

Key Facts

1998: The Office of the National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces (DND/CAF) Ombudsman was created to increase openness and transparency in the Department of National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces.
Current Ombudsman: Gregory Lick (November 2018 – Present)
Handling of cases by the Office of the Ombudsman:
- 2022-2023: 1,554 total cases
- 2021-2022: 1,931 total cases
- 2020-2021: 1,572 total cases
- 2019-2020: 1,867 total cases
Ombudsman special reports:
- 2023: Hidden Battles: A Systemic Investigation into the Identification of Mental Health Needs and Support for Primary Reserve Members Participating in Domestic Operations
- 2021: Independent Civilian Oversight: The Defence Community Deserves No Less – A Position Paper
- 2020: Engaged in the World
- 2018: Understanding Retirement and Disability Benefits
- 2017: Positions over People
August 2023: The Ombudsman launched a systemic review of CAF military complaint mechanisms, focusing on CAF handling of member health care complaints and scenarios involving limited or no right for CAF members to access grievance procedures.
The Ombudsman anticipates publication of this review in 2024.

Details

Committee Appearance: May 12, 2023

Ombudsman Lick appeared in front of the Standing Committee on National Defence (NDDN) as part of their study on the Military Health System and Provision of Health and Transition Services under the Canadian Forces Health Services Group.
During his appearance, Ombudsman Lick alleged that several of his office’s recommendations to improve health and transition services for military members have not been implemented by National Defence or the CAF.

Committee Appearance: April 6, 2022

Ombudsman Lick appeared in front of NDDN as they launched a study on recruitment and retention in the Canadian Armed Forces.
During his appearance, Ombudsman Lick shared his view that the grievance system is broken, emphasized the importance of culture change, and pressed for increased support for military families.

Legislation

On November 9, 2023, NDP MP Lindsay Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe) introduced C-362, An Act to establish the Office of the Ombud for the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces, to make related amendments to the Contraventions Act and to make consequential amendments to certain Acts (this Private Member’s Bill is outside the order of precedence).

DND/CAF Ombudsman’s systemic investigation with a focus on mental health (2023)

On September 6, 2023, the Ombudsman released a report entitled: "Hidden Battles: A systemic investigation into the identification of mental health needs and support for Primary Reserve members participating in domestic operations."
The Ombudsman found that Primary Reserve members participating in domestic operations are not having their mental health needs well supported.
The investigation revealed:
- inconsistencies related to mental health, including barriers to accessing supports before, during, and after a domestic Operation;
- a lack of procedural oversight to identify and support mental health needs;
- cultural challenges such as self-imposed, social, and structural stigmas that continue to be a barrier to accessing mental health supports; and
- limits to mental health care access caused by the class of Reserve Service employment before or after a domestic operation.

DND/CAF Ombudsman’s Position Paper (2021)

On June 22, 2021, the Ombudsman released a position paper entitled: "Independent Civilian Oversight: The Defence Community Deserves No Less – A Position Paper".
The Ombudsman argued that the Ombudsman’s office requires increased accountability of senior leadership and greater independent civilian oversight of National Defence to be an effective, objective oversight body for the Defence community.
The Ombudsman proposed changes to legislation, authorities, and reporting structures to allow for full administrative and structural independence from the Minister and Department of National Defence.

Office of the Auditor General (OAG) Report (2015)

In Spring 2015, the OAG conducted an audit to determine:
- Whether the Office of the Ombudsman for the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces (the Office of the Ombudsman, or the Office) established and followed key controls, and systems and practices, related to financial management, contracting, and human resource management in carrying out its mandate, in compliance with government legislation and policies; and
- Whether National Defence (the Department) adequately carried out its oversight responsibilities for the Office of the Ombudsman in compliance with government legislation and policies.
Findings:
- National Defence (the Department) did not fully define or document its roles and responsibilities for monitoring the administration of the Office of the Ombudsman for the Department of Defence and the Canadian Forces (the Office of the Ombudsman, or the Office). The Ombudsman was treated the same as other senior departmental managers in some cases, but not others.
- National Defence and the current Ombudsman agreed that the Department should monitor the Ombudsman’s financial and staffing authorities to ensure that they were properly exercised. However, the details of how this should be done and the mechanisms for monitoring other administrative activities were not fully defined or documented.
- Both National Defence and the current Ombudsman acknowledged the complexity of their organizational relationship. Department officials agreed that the Ombudsman is independent in his investigative functions and that he does not report to the Deputy Minister. However, both the Department officials and the Ombudsman agreed that the Deputy Minister has ultimate responsibility under legislation to ensure that delegations for financial management and staffing are properly exercised. The audit found that, if monitoring arrangements for these areas differ from those in place for other senior Department managers, they should be carefully defined and documented to ensure consistency with Treasury Board policies.
Recommendation:
- The Ombudsman for the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces and the Deputy Minister of National Defence should define and document how National Defence will monitor the management of the administrative functions of the Office of the Ombudsman.
- The Ombudsman and the Department of National Defence also define and document how the Office will demonstrate that internal controls, including delegated authorities, are operating as intended. Monitoring activities should not impede the operational independence of the Ombudsman.
The Office of the Ombudsman’s response. Agreed with the findings. The Office of the Ombudsman for the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces agrees that audit mechanisms, both internal to the Office of the Ombudsman and department-wide, are critical to demonstrating that the finance and human resource authorities delegated to the Ombudsman are appropriately exercised. The Ombudsman commits to working with the Deputy Minister of National Defence to review existing mechanisms, to conduct a gap analysis, and to address all outstanding issues.
National Defence’s response. Agreed with the findings. National Defence (with the Office of the Ombudsman for the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces) will define and document the processes by which it will monitor the administrative activities of the Office, to ensure that delegated authorities and internal controls are operating as intended. National Defence will ensure that these processes do not impede the operational independence of the Ombudsman.

Correspondence

June 2021: Ombudsman Lick sent a letter to then-Deputy Minister Jody Thomas and Chief of the Defence Staff Wayne Eyre calling for financial authorities taken away from the Ombudsman’s Office to be restored.
June 24, 2021: In their response to Ombudsman Lick, then-Deputy Minister Jody Thomas and Chief of the Defence Staff Wayne Eyre requested more information on the irregularities that occurred so that they could be reviewed and resolved.
The Corporate Secretary is not tracking any further correspondence on this issue.

Information Commissioner

I recognize that the Information Commissioner plays an important role in upholding the Access to Information (ATI) regime.
When the Information Commissioner brings forward a complaint, we work quickly to address her concerns.
Over the last three years, for example, the Information Commissioner has investigated and made findings on over 247 cases related to National Defence, and each year, the percentage of decisions that are well-founded has decreased.
National Defence makes every effort to comply with orders from the Information Commissioner to provide records to requesters within the stipulated timelines.
For example, we implemented a management action plan to improve our access system and streamline processes, in line with recommendations made by the Information Commissioner in 2020.
We are always learning and working to improve our ATI processes.
In fact, I am proud to say that the professionalism of our team was recognized by the Information Commissioner in her most recent report to Parliament.
Ultimately, we value the Information Commissioner’s important work to ensure that Canadians receive the information they are entitled to in a timely fashion.

If pressed on release of records related to COVID policies:

National Defence takes our ATI and Privacy responsibilities seriously and will continue to provide this service to Canadians to the best of our ability.
As this case is the subject of litigation between the Information Commissioner of Canada and National Defence, we cannot comment on this issue.
However, we can say that providing Canadians with access to government records is a cornerstone of transparency and accountability, and a pillar of Canada’s democracy.

Key Facts

Information Commissioner

The Information Commissioner is currently Caroline Maynard (as of March 2018).
The Information Commissioner reports directly to Parliament.
She appears before parliamentary committees and makes written submissions to them. She also publishes her annual report to Parliament and issues special reports when required.
The Office of the Information Commissioner carries out confidential investigations into complaints about federal institutions’ handling of access requests.
After investigating a complaint, the Commissioner may order the institution to disclose a record.

Statistics

As of January 31, 2024, National Defence has 92 active complaint files ongoing with the Information Commissioner.
National Defence has received 35 orders to date this fiscal year, 19 of which are now closed.
In fiscal year 2022-23, 146 complaints against National Defence were submitted to the Information Commissioner, compared to 209 complaints in fiscal year 2019-20.

Details

Information Commissioner’s 2022-2023 Annual Report

The Information Commissioner’s 2022-2023 report identified 4,140 total active complaints (across all departments) as of April 1, 2022.
- The departments with the highest number of active complaints as of April 1, 2022 were the Canada Border Services Agency (658); Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (652); and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (349).
- National Defence is identified as having 111 active complaints as of April 1, 2022.
In 2022, the Directorate of Access to Information and Privacy (DAIP) at National Defence won the Information Commissioner’s award.
- This award recognizes a person or ATI team for excellence in one or more of the following areas: communication; innovation; leadership; and/or service.

Complaint Activity in 2022-2023.

-	Active complaints in 2022–2023			Investigations completed in 2022–2023			Outcomes
-	Active complaints as of April 1, 2022	Complaints registered between April 1, 2022 and March 31, 2023	Total	Complaints registered before April 1, 2022	Complaints registered between April 1, 2022 and March 31, 2023	Total	Well founded	Not well founded	Discontinued	Resolved/ Cease to investigate	Refuse to investigate	Total
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada	652	4,685	5,337	590	3,807	4,397	69	78	177	4,060	13	4,397
Canada Border Services Agency	658	613	1,271	487	365	852	41	10	18	783	0	852
Royal Canadian Mounted Police	349	479	828	268	291	559	101	25	32	399	2	559
Canada Revenue Agency	218	199	417	142	81	223	61	26	44	90	2	223
Privy Council Office	237	172	409	112	91	203	62	70	26	44	1	203
National Defence	111	146	257	83	70	153	58	18	22	54	1	153
Library and Archives Canada	266	126	392	123	35	158	102	1	11	44	0	158
Global Affairs Canada	111	84	195	82	22	104	20	11	32	41	0	104
Correctional Service Canada	95	61	156	75	30	105	40	13	4	45	3	105
Health Canada	64	59	123	40	14	54	8	4	14	28	0	54
Employment and Social Development Canada	51	55	106	35	23	58	23	7	9	19	0	58
Transport Canada	104	51	155	59	14	73	30	10	5	28	0	73
Department of Justice Canada	99	49	148	67	14	81	17	26	22	16	0	81
Environment and Climate Change Canada	71	47	118	63	36	99	32	5	19	43	0	99
Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada	59	38	97	43	13	56	34	2	11	9	0	56
Indigenous Services Canada	44	36	80	26	15	41	16	2	12	10	1	41
Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat	28	36	64	26	15	41	9	14	8	9	1	41
Public Services and Procurement Canada	133	36	169	50	12	62	27	5	6	24	0	62
Public Safety Canada	21	34	55	17	17	34	8	8	4	14	0	34
Canadian Heritage	22	32	54	14	20	34	6	10	8	10	0	34
Department of Finance Canada	55	27	82	49	9	58	17	14	11	16	0	58
Public Health Agency of Canada	33	23	56	28	10	38	10	5	8	15	0	38
Fisheries and Oceans Canada	50	21	71	35	12	47	15	5	12	13	2	47
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission	17	21	38	16	15	31	14	0	3	13	1	31
Canadian Security Intelligence Service	54	21	75	38	13	51	6	23	13	9	0	51
Subtotal	3,602	7,152	10,752	2,568	5,044	7,612	826	392	531	5,836	27	7,612
Other Institutions	538	255	794	379	98	477	192	82	79	121	3	477
Total	4,140	7,407	11,546	2,947	5,142	8,089	1,018	474	610	5,957	30	8,089

Annual Improvements

The Information Commissioner completed a systemic investigation into National Defence’s overall processing of access requests in July 2020.
- The investigation was instigated partially in response to serious allegations made during the pre-trial hearings of Vice-Admiral Mark Norman, along with findings that the Information Commissioner had made in an earlier investigation involving the Office of the Judge Advocate General.
- The investigation culminated in a report, which outlined nine recommendations.
- The Commissioner’s 2020-21 Annual Report summarized the findings of the investigation.
Following the July 2020 investigation, National Defence introduced a management action plan to address the issues raised in the Information Commissioner’s report.
- Implementation of the plan led to the adoption of an electronic retrieval model, the streamlining of processes, and the improvement of relationships with Tasking Liaison Officers.
- The Information Commissioner’s 2021-22 Annual Report welcomed these improvements.

CAF Grievance Process Overview

The National Defence Act (NDA) gives CAF members the right to make a formal complaint called a "grievance" about any decision, act or omission in the administration of the affairs of the Canadian Forces for which no other process for redress is provided under the NDA.
- This is similar, but distinct, from the steps followed by public service employees governed by the Public Service Grievance Process, as outlined in the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act.
The CAF grievance process is a formal approach of resolving a matter for a grievor, and results in a decision that ensures a fair application of policy for a fair outcome for the grievor.
Individuals may only submit a grievance while they are a serving member in the CAF, and the grievor must state in writing to their Commanding Officer what they seek as redress.
A grievance must be submitted within three months after the day on which the grievor knew or ought reasonably to have known of the decision, act, or omission.
Grievors may seek informal resolution at the same time, and if successful, request to withdraw the grievance.
The first level of grievance decision is the initial authority (IA), typically the grievor’s commanding officer or the authority that is capable of granting the redress sought.
For all grievances, the IA is required to render a decision within four months. If the grievor is not satisfied with the IA decision, they can request the grievance be referred to the Final Authority (FA).
If the IA does not render a decision within four months, the grievor has the option to agree to an extension or choose to request that the grievance be referred to the FA.
The FA, which is the CDS or a delegate, will assess the grievance and, as recommended by Madame Arbour, will refer all grievances related to sexual misconduct, sexual harassment or sexual discrimination to the Military Grievance External Review Committee (MGERC).
- [For further information on the grievance process for complaints related to sexual misconduct, please see CAF Sexual Misconduct Grievances.]
A grievor who is not satisfied with an FA decision has the right to apply for judicial review in the Federal Court.
We will continue to improve our internal processes to enhance the complainant experience, and information available to support complainants.
- [For further information on efforts to modernize the CAF grievance process, please see Modernizing the CAF Grievance Process.]

Key Facts

National Defence will continue to prioritize grievances at the Chief of the Defence Staff / Deputy Minister level, so as to strengthen the CAF Grievance Standard and expedite the resolution of grievances.
The Chief of the Defence Staff has communicated expectations of CAF Commanders as part of expectation letters and Personnel Development Reviews, reinforcing the principle of accountability.

Military Grievances External Review Committee (MGERC)

The MGERC is an independent administrative tribunal reporting to Parliament through the Minister of National Defence.
The MGERC reviews military grievances referred to it, pursuant to section 29 of the National Defence Act, and provides findings and recommendations to the CDS and the CAF member who submitted the grievance.
The MGERC’s 2022 Annual Report noted that 345 grievances were submitted to the Committee from the CAF in 2022, compared to 322 in 2021 and 226 in 2020.
Of the 345 grievances received from the CAF in 2022, the MGERC delivered 142 findings and recommendations reports.
N.B. On 30 May 2023, the Military Grievances External Review Committee (MGERC) concluded that the vaccine policy requiring Canadian Armed Forces members to be vaccinated against COVID-19 or face release violated members’ Charter rights. MGERC decisions are non-binding recommendations to the Chief of the Defence Staff.

Modernizing the CAF Grievance Process

For an overview of the CAF grievance process, please see a CAF Grievance Process Overview.

For further information on the grievance process for complaints related to sexual misconduct, please see CAF Sexual Misconduct Grievances.

I fully recognize that transforming and modernizing the Canadian Armed Forces’ grievance and complaints processes is critical to our culture evolution efforts.
That is why we are ensuring that military members have access to options and services to find the best recourse options available to them when required.
For instance, we continue to implement the Chief of the Defence Staff’s directive on grievance system enhancements that was issued in March 2021.
In response to this directive, the Canadian Armed Forces is in the process of modernizing the military grievance system and will be launching several initiatives aimed at improving processes and outcomes for our members, including leveraging internal oversight capabilities.
An important first step in our grievance modernization efforts is the launch of a new digital grievance submission form, which took place on February 5, 2024.
This digital form is intended to simplify, standardize, and streamline the military grievance submission and resolution processes.
We will also develop a Canadian Armed Forces Grievance System Strategic Implementation Plan, which will include the establishment of informed service standards.
We will continue to improve our internal processes to enhance the complainant experience, and information available to support complainants.

Key Facts

The CAF continues to implement the Chief of the Defence Staff’s 3 March 2021 Directive on Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) Grievance System enhancements, with a view to achieving the Independent External Comprehensive Review Recommendation 10’s intent of causing no further harm.
- Since the issuance of this Directive, the Canadian Forces Grievance Authority has more than tripled its annual output of decision letters from the Final Authority.
- It has also significantly increased compliance rates with the Initial Authority time limit (within four months).
National Defence will continue to prioritize grievances at the Chief of the Defence Staff / Deputy Minister level, so as to strengthen the CAF Grievance Standard and expedite the resolution of grievances.
The Chief of the Defence Staff has communicated expectations of CAF Commanders as part of expectation letters and Personnel Development Reviews, reinforcing the principle of accountability.
In October 2023, Assistant Deputy Minister (Review Services) preliminarily finalized an independent advisory review of the CAF Grievance System, which will inform the CAF Grievance System Strategic Implementation Plan.

CAF Sexual Misconduct Grievances

My top priority and greatest responsibility is to build a Defence Team where all members feel protected, supported, respected, and empowered to serve.
I fully acknowledge the harmful impact that sexual misconduct and discrimination has on members of the Defence Team.
That is why we are working hard to advance meaningful culture evolution across the organization, including important progress on all 48 of the Independent External Review recommendations, some of which are related to military sexual misconduct grievances.
We recognize that the military grievance system must not cause further harm to the grievor due to delays in decision-making, and we are committed to taking the necessary steps to reduce harm wherever possible.
Of note, the Canadian Armed Forces Grievance Authority has referred all sexual misconduct-related grievances to the Military Grievance External Review Committee (MGERC).
Broad culture evolution reforms are being conducted under the Culture Evolution Strategy, which is being coordinated by the Chief Professional Conduct and Culture and will align, inform, and coordinate all culture evolution activities across National Defence.
We remain committed to implementing transformative change to support our people in uniform and provide them with the procedural fairness that they deserve.

Key Facts

Since the beginning of 2022, there have been 21 grievances related to sexual misconduct, sexual harassment, or sexual discrimination.
- Of these files, three are closed, and 18 are currently active within the grievance system. Of note, in accordance with IECR Recommendation 10, all are presently with the Military Grievance External Review Committee (MGERC).

Details

For additional information on the implementation of IECR Recommendation 10, please see IECR Recommendation 10; for Recommendations 7 & 9, please see IECR Recommendations 7 & 9.

Support for Department of National Defence Public Service Employees

Department of National Defence (DND) public service employees can make complaints of all forms of discrimination or harassment, including sexual misconduct or discrimination on the basis of sex, through the Workplace Harassment and Violence Prevention Program. Employees can report to their supervisor/manager or Designated Recipient Unit by completing a Notice of Occurrence form.
Conflict and Complaint Management Services (CCMS) representatives can provide support to all Defence Team members who would like to submit a formal complaint or are dealing with conflict.

Human Rights Complaints in the CAF

The Directorate of External Review works with the CHRC and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT) to respond to human rights complaints against the CAF. Complaints may be submitted by serving personnel or members of the Canadian public.
The CHRC complaint process is separate from the internal processes in the CAF. The Commission can decide that another grievance or review process is reasonably available to the complainant, and that they should exhaust it prior to involving the CHRC. This could include the CAF’s internal Conflict Solutions and Services (CSS) resources or recourse structures. However, complaints about sexual harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex may be submitted directly to the CHRC even if the CAF internal processes have not been exhausted.
Complaints are submitted to the CHRC, and the CAF receives complaints from the CHRC and provides a response directly to them. The Commission will then address the complaint in the manner it sees as the most appropriate course based on the information provided.

Military Grievances External Review Committee (MGERC)

The MGERC is an independent administrative tribunal reporting to Parliament through the Minister of National Defence.
The MGERC reviews military grievances referred to it, pursuant to section 29 of the National Defence Act, and provides findings and recommendations to the CDS and the CAF member who submitted the grievance.
The MGERC’s 2022 Annual Report noted that 345 grievances were submitted to the Committee from the CAF in 2022, compared to 322 in 2021 and 226 in 2020.
Of the 345 grievances received from the CAF in 2022, the MGERC delivered 142 findings and recommendations reports.

IECR Recommendation 7 & 9 (Canadian Human Rights Commission)

It is my top priority to ensure that Defence Team members are protected, respected, and empowered to serve.
To this end, National Defence is taking decisive action to fully address all of former Supreme Court Justice Arbour’s recommendations.
For instance, last August, I announced changes to the military grievance and harassment process, which allow military members to file complaints of sexual harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex directly with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC).
Canadian Armed Forces members who intend to file such complaints now have two options to do so, either via the existing grievance and harassment processes or directly with the CHRC.
Since this process was updated, three CAF members have filed directly to the CHRC.
In addition, the Canadian Armed Forces is no longer filing objections in response to member complaints of sexual harassment and discrimination on the basis of sex being filed directly with the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
These changes fulfilled Recommendations 7 and 9 of Madame Arbour’s report.
In advance of implementing these recommendations, we conducted an extensive period of consultation and planning between National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces, and the CHRC, to ensure a robust and smooth complaint process.
These changes to the military grievance and harassment process are supporting our work in fostering a safe and respectful workplace for all members, and we will continue to make substantial and concrete progress on culture evolution.

Key Facts

August 15, 2023: The Minister announced changes to the military grievance and harassment process, which implement Recommendations 7 and 9 of the Independent External Comprehensive Review (IECR).
Recommendation 7: The CAF should not file any objections based on section 41(1)(a) of the CHRA, and should allow the CHRC to assess any complaint for sexual harassment, or for discrimination on the basis of sex.
Recommendation 9: Any complaint related to sexual harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex or involving an allegation of retaliation for reporting sexual harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex should be first directed to the CHRC, should the complainant so choose.

Details

Implementation of IECR Recommendations 7 & 9

As of August 2023, any CAF members who have experienced sexual harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex while performing their duties can choose to bring their complaint directly to the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC).
With this change, a CAF member who intends to file a complaint of sexual harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex will have two options for lodging a complaint: 1) they can file a complaint through the existing CAF grievance and harassment processes, or 2) they can file directly with the CHRC.
Members who choose to go directly to the CHRC are no longer required to exhaust internal grievance and harassment processes first. This applies to both new and existing complaints.
This change has occurred because, as recommended by Madame Arbour, the CAF no longer objects based on section 41(1)(a) of the Canadian Human Rights Act in response to member complaints of sexual harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex being filed directly with the CHRC.

IECR Recommendation 10 (Fast-Tracking Grievances)

Modernizing complaint processes is a key component of National Defence’s culture evolution efforts.
That is why we are currently working to implement Recommendation 10 of former Supreme Court Justice Arbour’s report, which focuses on fast-tracking grievances related to sexual misconduct.
This recommendation is being addressed through the Canadian Armed Forces Grievance System Transformation which focuses on ease of reporting, improved responsiveness and timeliness.
Legislative and regulatory changes will take time and work may be required to reconcile Recommendation 10 with other grievance-related recommendations made by former Justice Fish.
However, National Defence will continue to undertake a series of measures in the interim that are consistent with existing laws and regulations.
Specifically, the launch of a new digital grievance form in February 2024 allows for early identification and prioritization of grievances related to sexual misconduct.
We expect the recommendation to be fully implemented by the end of this year.

Key Facts

The CAF continues to implement the Chief of the Defence Staff’s 3 March 2021 Directive on Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) Grievance System enhancements, with a view to achieving the Independent External Comprehensive Review (IECR) Recommendation 10’s intent of causing no further harm.

Details

IECR Recommendation 10

Per Recommendation 10, grievances related to sexual misconduct should be identified, prioritized and fast-tracked through the grievance system at both the Initial Authority (IA) and Final Authority (FA) levels.
The Vice Chief of the Defence Staff or their specific delegate should manage the process for all grievances related to sexual misconduct, sexual harassment or sexual discrimination or involving an allegation of reprisal for reporting, or otherwise disclosing sexual misconduct, sexual harassment or sexual discrimination. For such grievances, the Canadian Forces Grievance Authority should designate an IA with subject matter expertise, and who is outside the grievor’s chain of command.
QR&O 7.21 should be amended to make it clear that grievances related to sexual misconduct, sexual harassment and sexual discrimination should be mandatorily referred to the MGERC.
The CDS should remain the FA and be required to dispose of the matter within three months.
This recommendation is expected to be fully implemented by the end of 2024.

National Defence Information Management Systems

Includes lines on Declassification

We are committed to doing our part to make the Government of Canada more transparent and accountable, including by ensuring access to open information and data.
That is why National Defence is working toward improving our long-term information management (IM) processes, in order to position the Department to better share information internally and externally.
For example, we are working to consolidate information items into organized digital repositories.
We are also re-organizing hundreds of thousands of information items to reduce clutter and for better visibility of important information, in order to facilitate quicker retrieval.
This includes a partnership with Microsoft Canada to accelerate the use of SharePoint online, enabling modern IM tools such as AI-enabled categorization and labelling to fulfill departmental IM responsibilities.
This ongoing work will enable National Defence to move toward a digitally-enabled future, and to be more responsive and accountable in its missions at home and abroad.

If pressed on additional IM initiatives:

Work is also ongoing to ensure appropriate sensitivity markings are applied to documents, so that information can be shared as widely as possible.
Additionally, an information management course has been launched to familiarize National Defence personnel with best practices and requirements.
National Defence regularly publishes datasets, such as the Culture Transformation dashboard, and we are working with our Digital Transformation Office to increase the number of datasets included in its proactive disclosures.
A department-wide effort is also underway to inventory applications that manage data and information in an effort to reduce their number, making it easier to retrieve data and information, including for Access to Information requests.

If pressed on declassification:

Declassification processes at National Defence are performed in accordance with security orders and directives and associated with damage assessment methodology.
This is primarily guided by the Treasury Board Secretariat’s Directive on Security Management.
In addition, National Defence Security Orders and Directives must remain aligned with NATO, US and Five Eyes partners information security policies for interoperability and reciprocity reasons.

Key Facts

Strong, Secure, Engaged commits to investing in information management and information technology-related equipment, noting that agile information management systems are one of the key elements that provide Western forces with a technological and tactical advantage.
The 2023-24 Departmental Plan outlines the Department’s current objectives related to information management, including:
- Leveraging Defence 365 to deliver a centralized, unified, cloud platform where information can be managed and accessed from anywhere;
- Working with Government of Canada partners to ensure that information management solutions are secure, resilient, and recoverable from incidents in a timely manner; and
- Continuing to progress on the development of the Justice Administration and Information Management System, a real-time centralized military justice management and data-collection system, which will facilitate the administration of military justice.

Details

Directive on Open Government

The Directive on Open Government, released in 2014, seeks to maximize the release of government information and data of business value to support transparency, accountability, citizen engagement, and socio-economic benefits.
The Directive outlines a number of requirements for department Information Management (IM) officials, including the need to ensure that comprehensive data inventories are established and maintained; the need to ensure that open data and open information is released in accessible and reusable formats; and the need to maximize the removal of access restrictions on departmental information resources.
Further, the Directive requires that all departments develop and update, on an annual basis, an Open Government Implementation Plan to outline departmental direction, strategies, and initiatives undertaken to meet the requirements of this directive.
Work on this initiative is ongoing and National Defence expects to adopt an updated Open Government Implementation Plan in 2024/2025.

National Defence Open Government Implementation Plan

The current National Defence Open Government Implementation Plan describes the Department’s plan to complete activities and deliverables aligned with the requirements of the Directive on Open Government.
Through this Implementation Plan, National Defence committed to developing the Department’s IM capability, in order to ensure greater transparency and accountability and to better facilitate decision-making.
Specifically, the Plan commits to:
- Incorporating Open Government principles and direction into the next release of IM online training;
- Establishing and maintaining comprehensive inventories of data and information resources of business value; and
- Maximizing the removal of access restrictions on departmental information resources of enduring value.

National Defence Information Management Program

The IM Program is led by Assistant Deputy Minister (Digital Transformation Office - DTO), as the Chief Data Officer, and is implemented by Level 1 organizations across National Defence.
Assistant Deputy Minister (DTO) provides IM direction and procedures, with ADM(CIO) support of enterprise tools, and each L1 is responsible for implementing IM plans and activities within their respective operational areas.
The Defence Information Management Plan, released in 2019, sought to strengthen and mature the IM Program by driving digitization; developing and implementing standardized IM reporting; assessing IM services to measure compliance with emerging operational requirements; and supporting the career progression and development of IM professionals within National Defence.
An update to the Defence Information Management Plan is in development and is anticipated to be finalized in 2024.

Declassification of Records

Security categorization is based on the risks that exist at the time they were applied and dictates how government officials handle and store information.
Classified or protected information may lose its sensitivity with the passage of time or after the occurrence of specific events. When it is determined that the expected injury of disclosing such information is reduced, the original record can be considered for declassification or downgrading.
In April 2022, the Information Commissioner of Canada tabled a Special Report in Parliament calling on organizations to declassify records when it is reasonable to do so, in order to allow easier access to information that is no longer sensitive.
In December 2022, the Government of Canada tabled its Access to Information Review Report to Parliament. The report found that departments and agencies do not regularly assess their records for declassification, which can have performance impacts for access to information and downstream impacts on historical records transferred to Library and Archives Canada.
In February 2023, the Treasury Board Secretariat released an implementation notice, providing guidance on how departmental ATIP offices can modify their own declassification processes in light of these reports.

Page details

Date modified:: 2024-06-11