Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Standing Committee on Legislation has considered carefully the submissions provided by the public and the principles and components of right to information and ombudsman legislation in other jurisdictions. As a result, the standing committee has reached certain conclusions as to how to design legislation which might best meet the needs of the people of the Northwest Territories.

Principles

The Standing Committee on Legislation received many submissions which reflected a need for the government to make a strong commitment to access to information, and to certain underlying principles. During the public hearings, the following basic principles emerged as fundamental tenets, in the committee's view, of a workable and effective access to information system:

1. The public must be provided a right, protected in legislation, to have access to all information held by the government, subject only to limited and specific exemptions in the legislation;

2. Individuals must have a right of access to, and a right to request correction of, personal information about themselves;

3. The burden of proof must be upon the government to justify the withholding of government information;

4. A denial of access to information must be subject to independent review;

5. The legislation must prevent the unauthorized collection, use and disclosure of personal information by government;

6. The procedure for acquiring information must be clear, simple and accessible by residents of all NWT communities;

7. Fees must not form a barrier to access to information; and,

8. The legislation should contain a requirement for periodic mandatory review by the Legislative Assembly.

Jurisdiction Of Access Legislation

To a large extent, the practical implications of right to information legislation for the people of the Northwest Territories will depend upon the scope of the legislation.

Government in the Northwest Territories is large in relation to the population, and it exerts great impact on the lives of Northwest Territories residents. However, in addition to the activities of government departments, several other bodies play a large role in our daily lives. As the government proceeds with its community transfer initiative, the role of these bodies may become even more significant.

The standing committee discussed at length the question of the appropriate jurisdiction which should be held by right to information legislation. The standing committee is of the opinion that the right of access to information and of meaningful participation by individuals should extend to government in a broad sense. Right to information legislation should apply to all government departments, as well as government corporations and all boards, commissions and agencies to which the government appoints at least one member.

The standing committee is of the opinion that the Minister should examine the possibility of future extension of right to information legislation to bodies such as local government bodies and self-governing professional bodies, as well as organizations that receive a specific minimum level of government funding. However, further consultation with local government, in particular, is required before this step is taken. Access to government departments and agencies, boards and commissions should be accorded the first priority.

Review Of Right To Information Legislation

The standing committee recognizes the unique circumstances in the NWT and that difficulties may occur in the implementation of right to information legislation that cannot be anticipated at this time. A right to information bill should include a requirement that the legislation be reviewed by a committee of the Legislative Assembly after a period of time, such as three or four years, to ensure that the legislation is effective.

Access Provisions

In accordance with the previously outlined principles, the Standing Committee on Legislation takes the position that members of the public must have the general right to request and receive access to government records.

However, the standing committee recognizes, as well, that there are certain types of information which should not be available to the public, for various reasons.

The Members of the standing committee believe strongly that access legislation should be designed to first protect the right of access, with only such exemptions as are clearly set out in legislation. This approach is in contract to the more limited legislative design which allows public access only to specified types of government information.

Mandatory/Discretionary Exemptions

The standing committee was of the opinion that exemptions to the right of access to information should in most cases be discretionary, so that the government would be allowed to disclose information in appropriate circumstances, even though the criteria authorizing a denial of access were met. This design would allow for the greater amount of public access, without arbitrary restrictions.

Duty To Sever

The standing committee was of the opinion that right to information legislation should impose a duty upon government bodies to disclose as much of the information requested as possible. The government body should be required to disclose any information which can reasonably be severed from those portions which are subject to an exemption.

Public Interest Override

The standing committee is of the opinion that, in matters concerning significant risks to public health, public safety or the environment, "overrides" to exemptions from disclosure are warranted. Overrides should allow disclosure of information in cases where a compelling public interest in disclosure clearly outweighs the purpose of the exemption. As well, in certain circumstances, where the risk to the public warrants, the government body should be required to disclose information of a hazard even though no request has been made.

Exemptions To The Right Of Access

The Standing Committee on Legislation spent considerable time studying the types of information which should be exempt from the right of public access. Where other considerations outweigh the principle of the right of access, exemptions should be limited and specific.

Personal Information

The standing committee is of the opinion the right to information legislation must respect individual privacy. In general, personal information should be subject to mandatory exemption from disclosure to anyone other than the person to whom it relates.

Third Party Commercial Information

The standing committee recognizes that the interest of third parties may justify a refusal of disclosure of information. Right to information legislation should provide a mandatory exemption from disclosure for private commercial information supplied to the government by a third party, where harm would be reasonably likely to result from disclosure.

Law Enforcements And Legal Proceedings

The Standing Committee on Legislation is of the opinion that a government body might properly refuse to disclose a record where the disclosure would be reasonably expected to have an adverse impact on the enforcement of the law, or the conduct of legal proceedings. For instance, if a public body was in possession of a record which would interfere with an ongoing RCMP investigation if disclosed, or jeopardize the security of a correctional institution, it could be exempt from disclosure.

Information Harmful To Individual Or Public Safety

The standing committee is of the opinion that the refusal to disclose government information might also be justified where the disclosure might reasonably be expected to result in immediate and grave harm to an individual's mental or physical health or interfere with public safety.

Intergovernmental Information And Relations

Right to information legislation should also provide a discretionary exemption allowing the government to refuse to disclose information that might reasonably be expected to harm intergovernmental relations or negotiations, or to disclose information received in confidence from another government. This could also include information that would damage the financial interests of the government or interfere with the management of the economy.

Cabinet Records And Policy Advice

The standing committee recognizes that some protection of the deliberations of Cabinet can be justified. However, the committee heard concerns from the public that such an exemption may be applied too broadly.

The committee was concerned that factual information should not be automatically exempt from the disclosure simply on the basis that it was presented to Cabinet. Factual materials should be available for disclosure in accordance with the concept of severability.

Protection Of Privacy

The Standing Committee on Legislation concludes that comprehensive provisions for the protection of privacy must be an integral part of any right to information legislation. Such provisions would protect the privacy of individuals with respect to personal information held about themselves by government bodies, and would provide individuals with a right to access and request correction of that information.

Privacy components of right to information legislation should allow individuals to obtain access to personal information about themselves which is under the control of government bodies, subject only to specific legislative exemptions. Access to personal information should generally be granted only to a person to whom the information relates.

The standing committee was also of the opinion that the right to request the correction of personal information is an important component of right to information legislation.

The standing committee considered this right to be essential because of the significance that personal information has for the ways in which government institutions deal with individuals in a wide variety of situations. Incorrect personal information can have serious consequences for an individual in his or her dealings with an institution, for example, in relation to his or her entitlement to social benefits or suitability for government employment or contracts.

Where the institution refuses to make a requested correction, the legislation should provide that the individual has the right to make a notation to the file, to show the nature of the request and of the objection to the information.

Although this issue was not addressed specifically in the legislative action paper, the standing committee also concluded that in the interest of protecting personal privacy the legislation should restrict the government's freedom to collect, use and disclose personal information. Personal information should be collected only from the individual concerned except in limited situations.

The collection of personal information should be limited to the extent that it is necessary for the proper administration of the programs or responsibilities of the government body. Government bodies should be required to take reasonable care that information that is current and accurate, and should be able to use the information only for the purpose for which it was obtained, or related purposes. Clear restrictions on the disclosure of personal information should be placed on government bodies.

Individuals should enjoy the right to privacy with respect to personal information held about them by government bodies. Generally, personal information should be disclosed only to the individuals about whom it relates.

Community Access

Several individuals and organizations gave the clear message to the Standing Committee on Legislation that many residents in the communities of the Northwest Territories do not perceive the Government of the Northwest Territories to be understandable and accessible. Many presenters supported the concept of right to information legislation, but stressed that there must be a community focused model to enable all individuals to exercise their rights under the legislation.

The standing committee takes the position that right to information legislation must provide a framework for assistance with information requests at the community level. The committee cannot support the suggestion that government liaison offices, or other government employees, be automatically given this role. In many areas the committee was told that in order for the government's efforts to institute a right to government information to be credible, an individual who receives the support of the community must be given the role of "advocate" or "helper" to assist individuals with the preparation and submission of information requests, and to assist when the government response is not adequate. In many communities, it is crucial that this "advocate" not be associated with government. The committee holds the opinion that the communities should be consulted for their views as to the most appropriate vehicle for them.

Where a community person is chosen, the committee recognizes that the work of the "advocate" in assisting with information requests may be sporadic. However, the committee was of the view that a reasonable approach would be to contract local individuals on a fee for service basis, to perform services as required. The committee notes that the need for an independent advocate was stressed particularly strongly by the public with respect to access to a future ombudsman office, and is of the view that the role of the community advocate could be designed to facilitate public access both to government information and to future ombudsman services.

Fees

The standing committee received submissions with divergent views on the question of whether fees should be charged for the provision of access to government information. Members were concerned that the right of access to information should not be accorded only to those with the means to afford it, and wished to affirm the principle that access to information is a public right.

The committee is of the opinion that fees should not be charged by government bodies for access to the requester's own personal information. In the view of the standing committee, fees should not be charged on the basis of the time required to fulfil a public service in searching for a government document. A small administration fee, and charges to cover photocopying costs may be justified. The committee is of the opinion that where access is refused on the basis of an exemption in the statute, no fees should be charged.

Review Of Denial Of Request

The Standing Committee on Legislation deliberated extensively on the issue of the appeal of refusals by government bodies to grant access to requested information.

The standing committee is of the opinion that the review officer must be appointed by and responsible to the Legislative Assembly.

The standing committee devoted considerable attention to this issue, but is unable to present one specific alternative as a model selected by the committee.

The standing committee did, however, come to the conclusion that the government should give serious consideration to three options. The committee sees merit in the approach whereby an official, often called an "information commissioner" is given broad powers to investigate and review denials of access to information, and to order a government body to produce information. However, the standing committee recognizes that the power to order government action would not be compatible with the role of an ombudsman, should ombudsman legislation be passed.

The standing committee considered a second approach, which would institute a review officer with powers compatible with those of an ombudsman, to recommend government action. Where the government continues to refuse disclosure, or where the ombudsman recommends that the information not be disclosed, the individual would still be entitled to appeal in court.

The standing committee also considered a third approach which is not a model used in other jurisdictions. The committee recognizes the desire of the government to contain costs, and is aware that the services of a review officer under the legislation may not be required on a frequent basis.

The committee considered an alternative whereby the Legislative Assembly would appoint a panel to screen requests from applicants for the review of decisions of government to deny access to information. The panel might be authorized to appoint an ad hoc information commissioner where appropriate, who could fully investigate and rule on the request for information.

Under this scheme, the decisions of the panel and of the information commissioner would be final, subject to court review on administrative law principles. The committee is of the opinion that this model, or a similar one, might be given consideration by the government an option to the traditional, southern approaches.

That ends my section and I ask Mr. Whitford to continue, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.