Key messages

Information Commissioner’s mandate

My mandate is very specific: I investigate complaints about the handling of access to information requests by government institutions
Through my investigations, I provide complainants, institutions and other parties to the investigation with an opportunity to make their views known.
To maximize compliance with the Access to Information Act, I have a variety of tools and powers, including making orders.
I am committed to working closely with institutions to help them meet their obligations under the Access to Information Act and to address systemic issues.
I also advise Parliament on access to information matters, including through special reports.

My office and I are always looking at ways to improve and streamline the investigation process to reduce delays.
Complaints are categorized according to a number of criteria, including type (administrative vs refusal) as well as when they were received. We take a balanced approach to assigning complaints in order to make progress against each segment of our inventory.
This means that investigators are assigned both new files and older files, based on a variety of factors, including area of expertise, level of complexity, and type of complaint.

Certain records related to residential schools cannot be requested under the Act.
My office does not have the authority to access these records.

As few pre-2019 complaints remain in my inventory, most complaints now fall under the order-making model.
Since the coming into force of C-58, I have made 457 orders.
When I decide to issue an order, it is because the matters that were at issue during the investigation are not resolved.
We now publish information on all orders issued on our web site. You can find them by consulting our decisions database.

Orders are legally binding. This is the basic difference between them and recommendations.
Institutions are legally obliged to abide by my orders unless they apply to the Federal Court for a review.
I have no power under the Access to Information Act to force institutions to implement all aspects of my orders.
In a recent case before the Federal Court, I obtained an order of mandamus against an institution This type of extraordinary recourse to compel compliance should not be necessary.
I have now made three new applications for mandamus to seek compliance with one of my orders.
If the mandamus mechanism is the only means of achieving the desired outcome, I will continue to pursue this approach.

Culture change – the best legislation will never work if government leaders do not commit to making access a priority with clear objectives, resources, training, and innovation.
Legislative change – a strong legislative framework is the foundation of a strong access to information system.
Investment – in the necessary resources, training, tools and technology to support modernizing the system.