How Far Will Mark Adler Go To Be Re-elected?

Recent media reports show Conservative Party MP Mark Adler, first elected to the House of Commons in May 2011 and who is standing for re-election in suburban Toronto's York Centre riding, using his family's background to appeal to his base, both Christian and Jewish.

According to a tweet on August 16th, 2015 by Jonathan Kay, editor-in-chief of The Walrus, this campaign sign appeared in Toronto:

Note that Mr. Adler is:

1.) The son of a holocaust survivor.

2.) A strong supporter of Israel.

You would almost think that he was running for Israel's Knesset rather than Canada's Parliament, wouldn't you?

Not only does Mr. Adler proclaim his affiliation with the holocaust on campaign signs, as shown on this screen capture from his campaign website that he is the first child of a holocaust survivor to be elected as a Canadian politician:

In case you've forgotten, the very same Mark Adler was caught on camera back in January 2014 while on a boondoggle to Israel with the Prime Minister.  Given that Canadian taxpayers were funding his travel expenses, it seems that his interests lay with his re-election prospects as shown on this video:

In case you didn't catch it, here is the conversation that was being with Stephen Harper's aide, Jeremy Hunt, held at Israel's holiest site, the Wailing or Western Wall located in the old city of Jerusalem while Stephen Harper was being photographed:

"MA:  Jeremy, Jeremy, can I get in?

JH:  No

MA:  It's the re-election.  This is the million dollar shot.

JH:  I'm sorry, listen, you and three hundred other people.  If there's one person, you know....if I could have done this, it would be done already.

MH:  Can you get him over here later to shake hands or something?"

Interestingly, you'll note on this seating plan of the House of Commons that Mr. Adler's seat is about as far away from the Prime Minister's seat as is possible for a member of the Conservative Party of Canada:

Perhaps Mark Adler is right, that million dollar shot may well have moved him a few seats closer to Stephen Harper.  That is, if he gets re-elected.

Stephen Harper and the Illusion of Open Government

As part of its mandate of "openness", the Harper government established an "open data portal" website at data.gc.ca.  According to a March 31, 2015 speech by John Carmichael, Conservative MP for Don Valley West in Ontario, in 2012 - 2013, the Harper government provided Canadians with nearly six million pages of government information, more than ever before.  In addition, Mr.Carmichael states that the federal government has posted three million pages of archived government records online.

Let's see just how open one part of the Harper government was during 2014.  Since Tony Clement, President of the Treasury Board, was responsible for unveiling Canada's Open Government Action Plan in April 2012, I will focus on the data for completed Access to Information requests for the Treasury Board of Canada.  Monthly data for completed Access to Information Act (ATIA) requests can be found on the Treasury Board of Canada website for each month since July 2010.  For the purposes of this posting, I am looking at the complete dataset for the period from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014.  

The government has four main classifications for assessing an ATIA as being complete:

1.) Nothing disclosed (exemption)

2.) Partial disclosure

3.) Full disclosure

4.) No records exist

The "nothing disclosed" because of an exemption is an interesting classification.  Under this exemption, there are two types; class-based and harm-based.  Under class-based exemptions, it is presupposed that the information is inherently sensitive and that injury or prejudice will occur if the information is released.  This includes information that contains personal information (i.e. our income tax information) and information that could result in the release of trade secrets and confidential financial, commercial technical or scientific information of third parties because such information does not actually belong to a third non-government party.  Under the harm-based exemptions, if the head of the government institution deems that there will be some harm, injury or prejudice either to the government or a third party resulting from the release of the data, the data is subject to an exemption. This leaves the playing field wide open since a Minister can easily determine that the release of the data will result in harm to the Harper government.  If you are interested, here is a link to the Department of Justice webpage on the structure of the ATIA exemptions scheme.  

Now, let's look at the ATIA request completions by category for the Treasury Board for all of 2014 as shown on this bar graph:

In total, there were 212 completed ATIA requests in 2014 and just over half were disclosed in part along with one-quarter being disclosed completely.

Here is a pie chart showing the distribution of ATIA requests by level of completion:

As I noted above, you'll note that 51.9 percent of all completed ATIA requests in 2014 fell into the "disclosed in part" category and that only 24.5 percent fell into the "all disclosed" category.  The "disclosed in part" category means that taxpayers have absolutely no idea whether the government has disclosed 1 percent of the information or 99 percent of the information.  That is far from what any logical person would think of as "open government".

Let's look at a partial list of the requests that were "disclosed in part" and the number of pages of data released:

1.) copies of all statistics or other data, by department, indicating: depression, alcohol, anti-depressants, harassment, suicide, fraud, incompetence from 2005 to 2013 - 42 pages.

2.) list of briefing notes and Question Period notes for the month of December 2013 - 2 pages

3.) a copy of all documents showing the USB keys purchased by the Treasury Deparment for each year from 2005 to 2013 - 36 pages

4.) all documents including but not limited to, memos, emails, and reports concerning Senate pensions between September 1, 2013 and November 14, 2013 - 169 pages

And, here's the most ironic of the bunch:

5.) All summary budgetary information on the cost of implementing the Open Government initiative, including IT costs, administrative costs, travel, etcetera, since the start of the initiative - 470 pages

While the Harper government loves to tout the federal government's new culture of openness through the Open Government website, in fact, as we can see from the data in this posting, obfuscation is still the order of the day and it is quite clear that government openness is in the eye of the beholder.

A Look at Canada's Deficit and Debt History

March 2016

For an updated version of this posting, please click here.

With the Trudeau government about to unveil its first budget, I thought that we should take this opportunity to look back in history and see how a series of governments have created a debt situation that is becoming worrisome.  For this posting, I have sourced my data from this TD Bank publication which is current to February 2016.

Let's open by looking at Canada's political history since 1980:

1980 to 1984 - Pierre Trudeau (Liberal)

1984 to 1984 - John Turner (Liberal)

1984 to 1993 - Brian Mulroney (Progressive Conservative)

1993 to 2003 - Jean Chretien (Liberal)

2003 to 2006 - Paul Martin (Liberal)

2006 to 2011 - Stephen Harper (Conservative - minority)

2011 to 2015 - Stephen Harper (Conservative - majority)
2015 to present - Justin Trudeau (Liberal - majority)

Now, let's look at a table that shows Canada's fiscal history since the fiscal year 1986 - 1987, during the later years of the Mulroney government:

While I do realize that the Trudeau I government was responsible for significantly overspending its revenue, unfortunately, TD does not supply data going back that far.

As we can see, out of the past 31 fiscal years (including the projections for 2015 - 2016), the federal government has run a surplus for only 13 years with all but four of them either under the leadership of Paul Martin or under his guidance as Finance Minister.  Over the 11 consecutive years that the budget was in a surplus situation, the average surplus was $9.521 billion with Canada's best fiscal performance occurring in 2000 - 2001 when the budget surplus hit $19.891 billion.  On the other hand, the federal government has run a deficit for 18 out of the 31 years or 58 percent of the time.  Over the 18 budget years that the government ran a deficit, the average deficit was $20.889 billion with Canada's worst nominal fiscal performance occurring in 2009 - 2010 when the budget deficit hit $55.598 billion.   That single deficit erased all of the positive fiscal gains made between 2001 - 2002 and 2007 - 2008.

Now, let's look at the data in graphical form, starting with the annual deficit information:

This graph very clearly shows how the federal government has spent relatively little time in a balanced budget situation.

Here is a graph showing how Canada's federal net debt has grown since 1986:

The level of debt rose quite rapidly during the period from 1986 to 1997, growing from $257.7 billion to $562.9 billion, an increase of $305.2 billion or 118.4 percent.  Between 1998 and 2009, the net federal debt dropped slowly, hitting a low of $457.6 billion in fiscal 2007 - 2008.  Over that particular 11 year period, the debt dropped by $105.3 billion or 18.7 percent.  Once the world economy began to experience the impact of the Great Recession, Canada, like many other nations, found it necessary to massively increase stimulus spending.  Over the six year period from fiscal 2008 - 2009 to 2013 - 2014, the government spent a total of $144.569 billion more that it received in revenue.  This pushed the net federal debt up to $611.9 billion in fiscal 2013 - 2014, an increase of $154.3 billion since the Conservatives took control of the nation.

As I posted way back in 2012, as a Reform MP, Stephen Harper had what might be considered a very strong opinion on government fiscal balance.  In reference to then-Alberta Premier Ralph Klein and his efforts to balance the province's budget back in 1994, Mr. Harper had this to say:

"Although I can't speak of the details because it is not my area of expertise, what Mr. Klein is doing in Alberta is, in principle, what governments need to do.  He is taking a look at a situation that is unsustainable financially and he is taking the steps necessary through expenditure reductions to eliminate that financial uncertainty on a permanent basis within the life of a single Parliament.  That is the only way it ever gets done.  Any politician who says he is going to do it over two Parliaments is never going to do it.  That's the golden rule.  That's something that you can learn from Ralph Klein." (my bold)

Apparently, it's easier to talk about something than it is to actually do it.

As we can see, Justin Trudeau's warnings about his projected series of budget deficits will be just business as usual when it comes to Canada's federal government.  Sad, isn't it?

The Harper Government and Openness

Relatively little attention was paid to the recent Parliamentary vote on Bill C-613, An Act to amend the Parliament of Canada Act and the Access to Information Act.  The bill was introduced to the House of Commons as a private member's bill by Justin Trudeau on June 11, 2014.  The bill had a two-pronged approach to increasing government transparency as follows:

1.) requiring the Board of Internal Economy to open its meetings to the public 

2.) amending the Access to Information Act to modernize and clarify the purpose of the Act and to give the Information Commissioner the power to make compliance orders.

For those of you that are not aware, the highly secretive Board of Internal Economy is an all-party committee, chaired by the Speaker of the House, that is responsible for overseeing all House of Commons spending and other business.  Here is a list of the current members in which the Conservative Party members hold four of the seven seats:

The Board establishes the policies and guidelines that relate to expenditures and other resources accessible to MPs and Senators.  In the interest of "openness", the Board posts the minutes of its meetings on the Parliament of Canada website, however, these minutes are frustratingly scant on details of what actually took place and who said what during the meeting.  Here is an example:

As for the changes proposed to the Access to Information Act (ATIA), the original act came into effect in 1983 and recognizes the rights of all Canadians to obtain information from government institutions.  The law created a new authority, the Information Commissioner, who would investigate complains about non-compliance with the law's requirements.  At that time, Canada was on the vanguard of an international movement toward government openness with only five other countries having similar laws in place in 1982.  While it was put in place with the best intentions, the passage of time suggests that government officials have become adept at developing strategies that blunt the opportunities for openness that the law creates, in particular, the failure of the law to include many key federal institutions.  In her most recent annual report, Information Commissioner Suzanne Legault notes that there has been a 

"...steady erosion of information rights in Canada over the past 30 years and...has become a shield against transparency and has encouraged a culture of delay..."

As it stands, the Act requires institutions to respond to an access request within 30 days.  If a request will take longer to fulfill, the Act requires the institution involved to notify the Information Commissioner.  In 2002 - 2003, 69 percent of requests were responded to within 30 days, by 2011 - 2012, this had dropped to 55 percent.  In 2002 - 2003, 55 percent of extensions were for more than 30 days.  This rose to 79 percent in 2013 - 2014.  These delays prevent timely responses by the public and other interested parties to government policies and actions.  

After that background, let's go back to the subject of this posting.  Here is a link to the entire text of Bill C-613. 

Here is an excerpt regarding the meetings held by the Board of Internal Economy:

Here is an excerpt regarding the Access to Information Act:

Let's look at what John Carmichael of the Conservative Party had to say about Bill C-613:

"Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my concerns about Bill C-613, an act to amend the Parliament of Canada Act and the Access to Information Act, on transparency. I would like to focus specifically on the part of the bill that deals with the Access to Information Act.

As members know, this part of the bill proposes to change some of the wording in the “Purpose” section of the act to state that: 

(a) government information must be made openly available to the public and accessible in machine readable formats; 

(b) necessary exceptions to the right of access should be rare, limited and specific; and 

(c) decisions on the disclosure of government information should be reviewed and enforced independently of government. 

These amendments may seem to be only a few words on the page but their effect on the access to information system, and the infrastructure and resources set up to administer it, are far-reaching and costly.

Further, we object to the bill because these changes that it proposes are not necessary in light of existing practices under the act. In fact, they would overburden the administration of Canada's access to information regime. Indeed, they would lead to increased cost pressures and delays in responding to information requesters. 

The bill would also give the Information Commissioner order-making powers under the act. Once again, this is unnecessary. The Information Commissioner already has the strong mandate needed to investigate and resolve disputes concerning access to information requests.

However, while we do not support this bill, let there be no mistake about this government's commitment to transparency, accountability and getting government information into the hands of Canadians. Indeed, Canadians are accessing more government information now than ever before, and the government is more open and transparent today than it has ever been. We understand that government information and data can enhance the transparency and accountability of our public institutions, and spur economic activity. We are committed to strengthening and modernizing our access to information and privacy program. We have already accomplished a great deal in this respect."

Apparently, even though it was released the day before his part in the debate, Mr. Carmichael spent very little time looking at the statistics provided by the Information Commissioner that quite clearly show that the current government is quite adept at using stalling tactics to prevent Canadians from finding out about the inner workings of the Harper government in something approaching a reasonable timeframe.

As well, Mr. Carmichael states that the government posts summaries of completed access to information requests on the Treasury Board website which it does on a monthly basis.  Let's look at some one month as an example.  During the month of February 2015, there were 22 Access to Information requests completed.  Of the 22, only 4 or 18.2 percent were disclosed in full, 17 or 77.3 percent were disclosed in part and one showed that no records existed.  As for the "disclosed in part" requests, we have absolutely no idea how much information was deliberately held back by the government for such requests as the monetary disbursements made to employees who stopped working after the Government of Canada job cuts between 2009 and 2014 and the emails and texts sent or received by the Secretary of the Treasury Board related to the shooting at the War Memorial and Centre Block on Parliament Hill in October 2014.

Bill C-613 was defeated at its second reading on April 1, 2015.  Here's a list of who voted against the Bill which resulted in it being defeated 139 to 122:

So, when you hear this about "open data" from the Harper government...

...their voting record on Bill C-613 tells you just how committed they are to government openness and transparency.