A Commonplace Government Cover-Up

As the Conservatives become embroiled in controversy over a series of cover-ups, remember that manipulating the access-to-info process for partisan purposes is nothing new.

"What we are talking about is power – political power. We are talking about the reality that real power is limited to those who have facts. In a democracy, that power and that information should be shared broadly. In Canada today they are not, and to that degree we are no longer a democracy in any sensible sense of that word. There is excessive power concentrated in the hands of those who hide public information from the people and Parliament of Canada."

– Joe Clark, leader of the opposition Progressive Conservatives, 1978

In the world of political journalism, few stories are as alluring as those involving government operatives caught covering up, withholding, or otherwise delaying the release of damaging information. Such has been the case with Sebastien Togneri, an aide to Conservative cabinet minister Christian Paradis. Togneri was found meddling repeatedly in access-to-information (ATI) requests relating to a number of sensitive topics, such as U.S. President Barack Obama’s visit to Ottawa, asbestos exports, and a high-profile real estate transaction.

A news report published Monday reveals that Togneri did not act alone. In fact, senior staffers who were Togneri’s superiors were directly involved in what can best be described as organized obfuscation at the highest level.

As expected, the opposition has demanded a detailed investigation and, not surprisingly, Paradis’ resignation. Calling for the minister’s head over the actions of his staffers may be tempting, but it comes at the expense of examining how the system of information management and control works within the federal government. Judging from news headlines and the howls coming from the opposition’s benches, one could reasonably conclude that the exploitation of the ATI process for partisan purposes is a recent invention conceived by Stephen Harper and his team of spin-doctors within the PMO.

Unfortunately, this explanation is inaccurate.

Canada’s Access to Information Act (ATIA) came into law in 1983 after almost a decade of debate over the need to improve information flow from the political system to the public sphere. The act expressly forbids government officials from destroying, altering, or falsifying records, and from directing others to do so. At the time of its introduction, proponents argued that it would be an important check on executive power while enabling citizens and organizations to have a better understanding of government decision-making and citizen participation.

Others, however, were skeptical. Communication scholar Andrew Osler argued that “all cabinet documents, including discussion papers containing background explanations, analyses of problems or policy options, cabinet agendas and minutes, communications between ministers, briefing papers, and draft legislation were excluded from the act, to be released only at the discretion of the clerk of the Privy Council or ministers themselves.” In other words, while the legislation was an important step forward, it lacked the teeth to be truly effective in getting at the very problems of governance it was intended to address.

Context is always important in these cases. Canada’s ATI legislation came at a time of great unease over increased centralization of executive power and displeasure with the federal government. It was a period of declining economic performance, constitutional instability, inter-regional conflict, and national shame brought on by disgraceful behaviour from the RCMP. This was the age of “fear and loathing” in American politics, when a dishonoured presidency and backlash from within and outside of the government forced Congress to strengthen U.S. freedom-of-information laws.