Tories kill access to 'CAIRS' information database

[Moonlight Graham]

Another farewell to gov't transparency and accountability by Harper & gang. Say goodbye to CAIRS:

The federal Conservatives have quietly killed an access to information registry used by journalists, experts and the public that users say helped hold the government accountable.

The Coordination of Access to Information Requests System, or CAIRS, is an electronic list of nearly every access to information request filed to federal departments and agencies.

Originally created in 1989, it was used as an internal tool to keep track of requests and co-ordinate the government's response between agencies to potentially sensitive information released. Now, users mine the database to do statistical studies, fine tune phrasing on new requests and discover obscure documents - often using the information against the government.

"It was really a tool designed to make government more open," said CBC investigative journalist David McKie. "Now that it appears as though this is no longer going to be available it is very disappointing indeed and people are really wondering what the real motivation is."

Last week, a notice to civil servants from Treasury Board stated that effective April 1, "the requirement to update CAIRS is no longer in effect." A Treasury Board official confirmed to the Canadian Press on Friday that the system is being killed because "extensive" consultations showed it wasn't valued by government departments.

Instead, "valuable resources currently being used to maintain CAIRS would be better used in the collection and analysis of improved statistical reporting," said Robert Makichuk.

Since 2006, McKie has operated a website that publishes the monthly reports released through CAIRS on a publicly accessible website, www.onlinedemocracy.ca .

The online database allows the public to quickly search thousands of requests from over the years by typing key words into a search engine.

The documents are not available online, only the wording of the original access to information request, date, department, file number and general information about whether the requester was with the media, business, academic or other. But users can then make a written request for a copy of the already released documents by citing the file number.

"To do this now after the CAIRS' usefulness has been proven over and over again is indicative of the extent to which government will go to stifle the access regime," said Michel Drapeau, a lawyer who frequently uses the system and is a co-author of a reference work on access law.

"This is terrible and I consider this to be yet one more step in making records less accessible," he told Canadian Press.

New Democrat MP Dawn Black also condemned the Tories for shutting down the system. "It's another example of the Harper government's talk about accountability and transparency - they talk the talk but they don't walk the walk," said Black, who said her office often uses the database.

[margrace]

More of Mr. Harper's transparency, this is one of the most secretive and sly governments we have ever had

[nothinarian]

More of Mr. Harper's transparency, this is one of the most secretive and sly governments we have ever had

Anyone know stats on usage of this system ?

I scanned it briefly and seems to be a useful tool for access to info but if it is antiquated or not being used frequently then deep six it - value for dollar should be a factor in all government decisions because it is my dollar

[capricorn]

Good bye and good riddance to CAIRS. Another useless program has been axed. Keep it coming.

This has nothing to do with transparency Margrace. It has everything to do with spending money wisely and for measurable benefit. By the way, how often have you used CAIRS and for what purpose? I won't wait for a reply as I would guess the answer is nil, nada, not once.

[Topaz]

Good bye and good riddance to CAIRS. Another useless program has been axed. Keep it coming.

This has nothing to do with transparency Margrace. It has everything to do with spending money wisely and for measurable benefit. By the way, how often have you used CAIRS and for what purpose? I won't wait for a reply as I would guess the answer is nil, nada, not once.

Maybe you or I may not use it but there are people that do and the press being one is a good thing for the Canadians, just like the Senate is a good thing for the citizens of this country. I want the press to be able to find out what ANY seating government is up to especially as secretive as Harper is. YOU may wake up one morning and find out you aren't a Canadian anymore! What Harper wouldn't sell out to the NAU?? Think he wouldn't for a billion???

[margrace]

Isn't killing this program exactly what this transparent government is all about. Why were we, the public, not asked it we wanted it shut down. Another underhanded action by an underhanded government

[Fortunata]

Good bye and good riddance to CAIRS. Another useless program has been axed. Keep it coming.

There but for the grace of God go I.

Thank you oh Benevolent One for giving a me a brain to think for myself instead of being one of the herd.

[capricorn]

Isn't killing this program exactly what this transparent government is all about. Why were we, the public, not asked it we wanted it shut down.

Margrace, like it or not, the Conservatives are the elected government. The elected government makes decisions on behalf of Canadians. If Canadians object to government decisions, such as canning CAIRS, they'll vote them out in the next election. From where I sit, axing CAIRS will have zero impact on my life or yours. I ask you, should the government hold a referendum on every decision it takes? That is the only way it could consult with the population, other than an election. You may want to micro-manage the government. As far as I am concerned, I have better things to do with my time.

Another underhanded action by an underhanded government

Yes, those Conservatives are sneaky and contemptible.

[nothinarian]

Margrace, like it or not, the Conservatives are the elected government. The elected government makes decisions on behalf of Canadians. If Canadians object to government decisions, such as canning CAIRS, they'll vote them out in the next election. From where I sit, axing CAIRS will have zero impact on my life or yours. I ask you, should the government hold a referendum on every decision it takes? That is the only way it could consult with the population, other than an election. You may want to micro-manage the government. As far as I am concerned, I have better things to do with my time.

Yes, those Conservatives are sneaky and contemptible.

Heard Newman on Friday with reporter round table and all reporters said they seldom , if ever , used it including Don Martin who had never heard of it - although one star reporter - Delacourt i think, mentioned that some of her colleagues dabbled with it

Grassy knollers think it is part of a master plan but hopefully just a money saving effort made in good faith

[jdobbin]

This has nothing to do with transparency Margrace. It has everything to do with spending money wisely and for measurable benefit. By the way, how often have you used CAIRS and for what purpose? I won't wait for a reply as I would guess the answer is nil, nada, not once.

Perhaps Harper has better ideas about how to make freedom of information more timely and transparent. At the moment, we see a lot of blacked out material and reports for chartered flights buried in departmental files that take quite a lot of time to sift through. It certainly is the transparency that Harper promised.

As for saving money, I'd rather cancel his railroad and some of the other special projects for his riding.

[capricorn]

At the moment, we see a lot of blacked out material and reports for chartered flights buried in departmental files that take quite a lot of time to sift through.

And the blacked out material is more than when the Liberals were in government? Do you have proof of this?

[nothinarian]

And the blacked out material is more than when the Liberals were in government? Do you have proof of this?

the proof is the proof is the proof

Transparency ?Chretien never - Martin most definitely - see misguided Gomery enquiry

[Fortunata]

Heard Newman on Friday with reporter round table and all reporters said they seldom , if ever , used it including Don Martin who had never heard of it - although one star reporter - Delacourt i think, mentioned that some of her colleagues dabbled with it

Grassy knollers think it is part of a master plan but hopefully just a money saving effort made in good faith

I think you might have heard wrong. Susan Delacourt says she doesn't use it herself but knows lots who do. Chris Hall didn't say if he used it or if he knew anyone who did. Don Martin says he never has heard of it. Rob Russo said two of his colleagues use it extensively.

Rob Russo also said that the time frame for information has effectively doubled since the Conservatives have come to power.

[jdobbin]

And the blacked out material is more than when the Liberals were in government? Do you have proof of this?

You are the one bringing up the Liberals. I didn't. I said the Tories promised transparency and accountability.

A year ago this month, this is what the Information Commissioner said:

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/politics...73ca&k=7741

The Privy Council Office, which serves Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his cabinet, gets a failing grade for persistently dragging its feet on public requests for access to government information, Canada's new information czar says in a surprisingly tough report.

"Too often, responses to access requests are late, incomplete, or overly censored," Information Commissioner Robert Marleau said in an introduction to his first annual report. "Too often, access is denied to hide wrongdoing, or to protect officials or governments from embarrassment, rather than to serve a legitimate confidentiality requirement."

In terms of respecting the Access to Information Act, the Privy Council Office, which serves as the cabinet's nerve centre, is setting a bad example for other departments, the report charged.

[nothinarian]

I think you might have heard wrong. Susan Delacourt says she doesn't use it herself but knows lots who do. Chris Hall didn't say if he used it or if he knew anyone who did. Don Martin says he never has heard of it. Rob Russo said two of his colleagues use it extensively.

Rob Russo also said that the time frame for information has effectively doubled since the Conservatives have come to power.

Fair enough - Didn't record Newman but your take and my take are not far off - Martin never(surprise); Delacourt never (real surprise); Hall - no opinion which means never by default; Russo - never but knows some that do

I would like to see stats on usage - not denying Harper might be covering up but think of strategy - why would he further alienate an already alienated (and angry) media if this was a big issue for them

[Fortunata]

I would like to see stats on usage - not denying Harper might be covering up but think of strategy - why would he further alienate an already alienated (and angry) media if this was a big issue for them

If it were only used once in a blue moon it wouldn't be important enough for the press to be worried imo. That it is used "extensively" by some (as Russo said of his colleagues at the Canadian Press) is enough to be kept as those numbers have to be kept for tracking by the government anyways, yes? If the timeframes aren't public, how is this transparent? Is Harper trying to hide the fact that times have doubled?

As far as alienating the media, Harper doesn't care. He has already dubbed the media "liberal" and now can point to them and say, well they are always down on us poor Cons. Regardless of what people say I really think that Harper is paranoid to a certain extent about the "liberal" press, the "liberal" bureaucracy, etc. This is why we see him do what he has done over his PMship.

You put this one small thing together with all the other small things and see what you make of it.

[nothinarian]

If it were only used once in a blue moon it wouldn't be important enough for the press to be worried imo. That it is used "extensively" by some (as Russo said of his colleagues at the Canadian Press) is enough to be kept as those numbers have to be kept for tracking by the government anyways, yes? If the timeframes aren't public, how is this transparent? Is Harper trying to hide the fact that times have doubled?

As far as alienating the media, Harper doesn't care. He has already dubbed the media "liberal" and now can point to them and say, well they are always down on us poor Cons. Regardless of what people say I really think that Harper is paranoid to a certain extent about the "liberal" press, the "liberal" bureaucracy, etc. This is why we see him do what he has done over his PMship.

You put this one small thing together with all the other small things and see what you make of it.

Agree that he has the house of cards thing going on with transparency but I need some proof of net benefit to society versus costs incurred before I condemn

Also heard that in addition to media Judy Waschylecia Leis of NDP uses the system extensively

Do you know of others?

[Fortunata]

Agree that he has the house of cards thing going on with transparency but I need some proof of net benefit to society versus costs incurred before I condemn

Also heard that in addition to media Judy Waschylecia Leis of NDP uses the system extensively

Do you know of others?

I don't know how many others but the net benefit to society is openness and transparency which is the very core of democracy. Think about this: the government keeps these stats regardless of whether the public can access them or not. How much is it to keep it on the internet along with everything else the government has on the internet? Very little I would think.

[nothinarian]

I don't know how many others but the net benefit to society is openness and transparency which is the very core of democracy. Think about this: the government keeps these stats regardless of whether the public can access them or not. How much is it to keep it on the internet along with everything else the government has on the internet? Very little I would think.

Thought gun registry( I know - don't go there) was easy as well but look at millions (probably not billions) that was required to keep track of a few serial numbers

But agreed - it is tough to put a number on transparency

[Moonlight Graham]

Grassy knollers think it is part of a master plan but hopefully just a money saving effort made in good faith

Even if it is a money-saving move, is there any way in heck we'll see some sort of effort to design a replacement from the Conservatives that is more effective than CAIRS was? I think not.

[nothinarian]

Even if it is a money-saving move, is there any way in heck we'll see some sort of effort to design a replacement from the Conservatives that is more effective than CAIRS was? I think not.

define effective - my point is I don't see anybody screaming about the need for CAIRS - I will not debate the fact that it is a move away from transparency but will debate the value for money issue - probably a good question for Dion and co. to address in QP - why drop it ? what is the economic argument? and what will replce it?

[margrace]

Perhaps this is a good example of controlling access to information: This is how easily it can be done.

When Adbusters found its spoof ads banned by the corporate media, the

question of the right to communicate came into play.

Kalle Lasn is a fighter for the right to communicate. A privilege,

says the founder of Adbusters magazine, that goes one step farther

than the freedom of speech.

"You can stand on the corner and shout at people as they are going

by," Lasn says. "But if a handful of corporations have media in their

pocket, they can totally hoodwink the public."

From his home in Vancouver, Lasn himself communicates to the masses on

the pages of Adbusters -- a 10-year-old culture-jamming magazine

published through the Adbusters Media Foundation.

On Feb. 18, the Supreme Court of British Columbia dismissed a case

that Lasn brought forth, which argued that Canadian TV conglomerate

CanWest Global was obligated, under the Canadian Broadcasting Act, to

sell television advertising time to Adbusters.

The court's dismissal reiterated the rulings of North American courts

that have found private TV broadcasters under no obligation to allow

the public access to public airwaves.

James H. Ewart Add Busters publication

[jdobbin]

define effective - my point is I don't see anybody screaming about the need for CAIRS - I will not debate the fact that it is a move away from transparency but will debate the value for money issue - probably a good question for Dion and co. to address in QP - why drop it ? what is the economic argument? and what will replce it?

I think this person whom the Tories admire puts forth the argument well. It pretty much trashed the Tory talking points. I'm sure it will come up in Question Period tomorrow.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...05?hub=Politics

Conservative government has killed a flawed but workable information registry rather than open itself to real public scrutiny, says an academic who was quoted glowingly Monday by Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

The Conservative party line backfired when Alasdair Roberts -- "a leading expert on access to information law,'' according to Treasury Board President Vic Toews -- trashed their talking points moments after the daily question period.

At issue is a 19-year-old registry known as CAIRS, for Co-ordination of Access to Information Requests System.

Created in 1989 to allow central government oversight -- and control -- of all access requests, the system has slowly evolved into a crucial catalogue allowing a public signpost to millions of previously released documents.

The Canadian Press revealed on the weekend that Treasury Board quietly killed the registry last month.

Under outraged questioning Monday in the Commons, Harper said the plug was pulled because CAIRS is expensive and slows access to government information.

Harper then cited a 2003 report by Roberts on government secrecy.

"It (CAIRS) was called the product of a political system in which centralized control is an obsession and that is why the government got rid of it,'' Harper told the Commons.

Toews subsequently claimed the same virtuous high ground, citing Roberts verbatim.

But neither Harper nor Toews mentioned that Roberts had recommended fixing the problem by making the registry public online -- something the federal information commissioner reported in 2004 could be done "at virtually no cost'' to government.

Roberts subsequently took on the task on his own time and website, and it his been maintained since 2006 by CBC Radio reporter David McKie.

"They really don't care what I think about CAIRS or any other aspect of ATI,'' Roberts said Monday from New Delhi, India.

"If they did they would have taken my advice about CAIRS a few years ago when I said they ought to switch on the capacity to make the entire thing publicly accessible.''

[Alta4ever]

Wow look at the vocal interests on this board whine!

Any government scandal tory or liberal was never found through this, it was people who came forward with information, not the press finding it through an access to information data base. Any wonder why the press never uses it? The fact is this government is doing what the people of Canada want and need, they are leading us into the future. They are not squabbling over coffee like the Ont. Liberal Gov. is. They are not dithering back and forth on issues like the last Liberal government, and they are not leaving new legislation to judges (Chretiens government), this Conservative Party Government under Harper is doing something no government has done in 30 years. They are leading our country on an ascending path to future greatness. That is something more then vocal interest (NDP) and the vested interests (Liberals) of this country who do not seem to be concerned with what is best for Canadians. Just the groups they represent with no regard to the future. The tide is turning!

[jdobbin]

Wow look at the vocal interests on this board whine!

Any government scandal tory or liberal was never found through this, it was people who came forward with information, not the press finding it through an access to information data base. Any wonder why the press never uses it? The fact is this government is doing what the people of Canada want and need, they are leading us into the future.

The Tories didn't follow the advice of the person they cited all day in regards to CAIRs. Reporters from Canadian Press use the registry all the time according to CP.

I think I've heard this talk about the glorious future of the Conservative party before about they follow the brilliant north star. I thought they dropped that campaign.