Do He Still Feel This Way?

Danny Williams pushed for strengthened access-to-information laws during debate in the House of Assembly in 2002, calling for more "teeth" and shorter timelines for disputes to be resolved. But the Williams government has not followed through on those proposals, which were rejected by the Liberal administration of the day. And many of the issues Williams worried about in Opposition have come to pass under his government.

During debate on new access-to-information laws in the legislature on March 14, 2002, Williams fretted about the 90-day deadline in the law for commissioner's reports to be completed on disputes over secrecy issues. "This is just another one of the sections where the Opposition feels that the time frames should be shortened, " Williams told the House. Called for other changes That wasn't the only timeline he wanted changed.

"There are several matters that are of concern to the Opposition in the act, and in situations where we feel that cabinet documents and cabinet confidences and that, the time period should be reduced so that we have access to them as well. "Williams said he was particularly worried the process could drag out for those seeking access to government information. "I would like to just go quickly through the process that is involved here, if I want to start or anybody else in the province wanted to start, or the media wanted to try and get some information out of the system, " Williams said. "According to my calculations, it could be at least a year or more if you go through all the process in order to get the information that is required.

"He also wanted the independent body overseeing investigations to have "teeth" - the ability to order governments to comply with decisions, instead of just making recommendations. "The citizens' representative makes a recommendation, government does not listen, then you have the option of going to the courts, and you are now well beyond a year. In our opinion, that is not access to information. That is wrong.

"The role of citizens' representative was changed to information and privacy commissioner. But while the title changed, the powers of the position did not.In 2002, Williams decried that lack of authority. "This piece of legislation is nothing but a sham," he told the House.

The Tory government has not moved to shorten the 90-day deadline. The 90-day deadline remains in place, but is routinely not met.The Telegram has had one file under review by the information commissioner for more than 10 months. Another appeal was filed more than five months ago.

The government has also not moved to give the commissioner more powers, as Williams advocated in 2002.As reported in The Weekend Telegram, civil servants in Executive Council - which serves the premier - have been quietly directing other departments and agencies to withhold information from release, ignoring recommendations from the information commissioner.

Information commissioner Ed Ring has downplayed the importance of the 90-day deadline in the past. "(I'm) not too concerned about the 90 days, and I believe the public bodies really take to heart that what's most important here is that the right thing is done," Ring told The Telegram in July."And if it takes 90 days, or 91 days, or 191 days, at the end of the day, when we come out with our recommendations, we expect the public bodies to abide by them. "That, however, has been happening less in recent times. To date in 2008-2009, the commissioner disagreed with the public body in seven out of 11 reports.But his recommendations were accepted in just three of the 11. They were rejected in four, partially accepted in one, and there were no recommendations given in the other three. The law requires a review of the province's access to information legislation by early 2010.

Brudder