OTTAWA | We all experienced it in our childhood.
In front of a film playing on TV, an older person covers our eyes to hide a scene that is too violent, too daring, too crude, under the pretext that it is not our age, that we would not understand.
I sometimes have the impression that it is the same infantilizing reflex that drives public institutions which refuse to disclose to the population what they know.
Infantilizing
Journalists, the population, historians, researchers would not understand. So, we take our time, until the information requested is no longer useful.
We redact generously, we hide relevant information that would allow us to understand the reasoning behind a decision.
What was the purpose of this briefing note sent to the minister? What was the officials’ recommendation?
Who participated in this meeting? What was the conclusion of this study that led to this decision?
So many questions that often remain a mystery.
We put our foot down to say as little as possible.
Ministries often prefer to protect themselves, to keep us in the dark, for their own sake more than for ours.
The Journal published a major file on access to information last weekend.
The reaction of the responsible minister Anita Anand? For the moment, everything is going well, the revision of the Access to Information Act can wait until after the next elections.
Counter-example
However, the federal government has before it a magnificent counter-example, which has demonstrated all the benefits of transparency: the Rouleau commission on the state of emergency.
For weeks, journalists and the population had access to unpublished information which unfortunately was too rarely made public.
During the work of the commission, we were presented with:
- Reports of interviews with ministers and the Prime Minister
- Text messages between ministers and advisors to the Prime Minister
- Intelligence reports written by police forces and even the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (albeit redacted, but still)
- Summaries of cabinet of ministers meetings
Information that shed new light on the decision-making mechanisms of the Canadian government in times of crisis.
Without this public inquiry, we would know a fraction of what we know today about how our decision-makers acted during this moment of intense social unrest.
The sky did not fall.
The oyster closes
The Trudeau government instead took advantage of this momentary burst of transparency.
By exposing the facts, the population was able to make up their own minds and the vast majority believe that Ottawa has little to be ashamed of.
It is quite the opposite in the case of the Commission on Foreign Interference which has just started.
The federal government is fighting to say as little as possible in public, during the work of this public inquiry commission, claiming that it would be too long or expensive to declassify documents.
It is obvious that certain information must remain confidential, but once again, we still have the impression that Ottawa takes us for school children who must be taught a lesson.
Chinese interference in our 2019 and 2021 elections may not have changed the final outcome, but it has undoubtedly raised doubts in the minds of Canadians about the integrity of our democratic processes.
It is certainly not by once again preferring the culture of secrecy that they will dissipate.