[Image-1]
Nova Scotians are not known for their “right to know” activism. We might march in the streets to remember veterans or to protest moose culls and school closures but typically we do not march in the streets demanding transparency and accountability from our local and provincial governments.
But Nova Scotians file more access to information requests per person than British Columbians, Albertans and all of our Maritime neighbours. It is a well-kept secret that Nova Scotians are curious about the secrets of democracy. They want to scrutinize government spending and examine for themselves the content of government contracts paid for with our tax dollars. Citizens want to know about the impact of gambling, why local governments failed to clear snow in their neighbourhoods and where the fire hydrants are located.
It is a sign of a healthy, vibrant democracy when politicians and bureaucrats are subject to effective access to information laws. Nova Scotians can be proud of our long heritage of access to information rights that began in 1977 long before the recent explosion of right to know laws around the world. Our forebears got it right when they said public bodies should be fully accountable to the public. The public must have a right of access to government records to ensure fairness in decision making, facilitate informed public participation in policy formulation and permit the airing of divergent views.
Yet, Nova Scotia’s access to information law was written at a time before cell phones, text messages and email. Big data, outsourcing and alternative service delivery weren’t even imagined and are certainly not contemplated in our access law. As a result, our outdated law is rated 51st in the world behind such countries as Russia, Azerbaijan and Bangladesh.
Access to information laws that rank higher than Nova Scotia’s feature very limited fees and very tight timelines. Oversight agencies are given strong powers to ensure that the law is effective and that responses by government are accurate and complete.
Moreover, higher-ranking access to information laws prevent governments from being able to avoid accountability by avoiding documentation. There is a growing concern in Canada and around the world that a new practice of “oral government” is undermining meaningful access rights. This is the practice in some jurisdictions of simply not writing down decisions, or using post-it notes and text messages that are quickly deleted.
Modern access laws address this concern by creating a duty to document. A requirement that politicians and bureaucrats must document deliberations, actions and decisions so that the information and rationale behind the decisions can be scrutinized by citizens.
Earlier this year Canada’s Information Commissioners called on their respective governments to create legislated duties requiring public entities to document matters related to deliberations, actions and decisions.
There is much to be learned from advances in other jurisdictions. In order to maintain our healthy, vibrant democracy and ensure that Nova Scotians continue to have a meaningful right to access government records, it is time to review and update our access laws to meet the needs of democracy in the 21st century.
———
Voice of the City is a platform for any and all Halifax individuals to share their diverse opinions and writings. The Coast does not necessarily endorse the views of those published. Our editors reserve the right to alter submissions for clarity, length and style. Want to appear in this section? Submissions can be sent to voice@thecoast.ca.
Related Stories
14 of the best datasets inside Nova Scotia’s new open data portal
Fight the power at Cybersecurity for Activists
Nova Scotia still missing key privacy protections says report
Halifax’s overburdened FOIPOP office wants to go digital
This article appears in Mar 3-9, 2016.
Not Azerbaijan! Tbe horror!
Okay, it’s a simple change; there’s lots of best-practice models. Maybe do something about it? In the interim, we’re getting the information anyway so I won’t worry too much; but I will look forward to the scandals that this new legislation will produce!
problem is, we’re not actually getting all the information. When you compare a FOIPOP to a court submission for instance, the FOIPOP is 100 pages compared to 400 in the file. Not just redacted, but simply omitted from the FOIPOP. Also, the use of personal and verbal communications methods rather than regimented controlled environments, lots of things happen that the public will never know. It takes a lot of research sometimes to find the gaps.
As the director of one of the two organisations that produced the Rating on which Nova Scotia comes 51st globally (out of 103 countries, by the way – see: http://www.RTI-Rating.org), I fully endorse the sentiment in the main piece that calls for updating and modernising the Nova Scotian legislation (and reject the idea in the comment above that we are getting the information so we don’t need to worry too much about it). I find it most unfortunate that Nova Scotia falls behind the countries mentioned in the piece (and 47 others!), particularly since our current government promised to fix the legislation among the promises it made during the last election campaign. Come on Nova Scotia – we can do better!