It’s tough for refs to call a good game if they can’t throw anyone in the penalty box.
You are supposed to be able to ask the government for documents and it’s supposed to give them to you, under law.
But right now, the Saskatchewan government doesn’t face any consequences if it breaks its own rules.
These freedom of information requests are important to keep governments accountable. And they only work if the government follows the rules.
Without making access to information requests, the Canadian Taxpayers Federation wouldn’t have been able to find out that the City of Saskatoon spent $90,000 putting in a single downtown back alley. Another request revealed that the provincial government spent its own budget.
Now, of course, you can’t get any information you want. The government won’t hand over any personal details or business information. However the province is legally obligated to be transparent and provide documents about the decisions it makes and the money it spends.
This right to access information is so important that according to the law, the government has a responsibility to help you find what you are looking for.
But if the government isn’t following the law and providing information, you are forced to file a complaint with the Saskatchewan Privacy and Information Commissioner. That’s the independent official whose job it is to make sure the government is being transparent. The commissioner is the ref.
Here’s the problem – even if the commissioner finds that the government is breaking the rules, there are no real consequences. At worst, all the government can expect is a stern phone call from the commissioner’s office.
And that’s caused huge problems for taxpayers trying to keep the government accountable and transparent. Even politicians have trouble getting anything out of the government.
The Official Opposition has struggled to get the government to release information on time. The government failed to follow its own for releasing information about how much the new payroll system for the health-care system cost. Last year, the government tried on another opposition request about payments made by the government to a hotel owned by an MLA.
The commissioner also ruled that the government should be posting online in a recent report. It’s not hard to do. Alberta does it. The overwhelming majority of First Nations do it. The CTF did the job for the Saskatchewan government and municipal financial statements online. The government completely ignored the commissioner’s ruling and still refuses to post the statements.
Overall, the government only fully follows less than half of the . The government ignores about one recommendation per month, on average.
It’s time to empower the ref. Regina just needs to do what are already doing – allow the commissioner to make legally binding orders.
The federal government and the governments of Alberta and Quebec all allow their commissioners to the government to follow the rules. Saskatchewan needs to do the same.
Even if the documents in question contain nothing noteworthy, government shouldn’t be hiding documents from taxpayers.
Saskatchewan’s current commissioner has asked for this. His report notes that not only do his equivalents in other provinces have this power, but so do other similar figures in Saskatchewan, like the Ombudsman.
The ombudsman focuses on investigating accusations of unfairness in government services and can make binding orders on the government. It only makes sense that the commissioner, in charge of investigating the government for keeping secrets, should have the same powers.
The commissioner is meant to operate as the referee between taxpayers requesting documents and the government. Again, what good is a referee who can’t give anyone a penalty?
Right now, the government is breaking all kinds of rules, but the commissioner can’t throw anyone in the penalty box. It’s time for that to change.
Gage Haubrich is the prairie director and Ethan Fisher is the communications co-ordinator for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
The commentaries offered on Â鶹´«Ã½ are intended to provide thought-provoking material for our readers. The opinions expressed are those of the authors. Contributors' articles or letters do not necessarily reflect the opinion of any Â鶹´«Ã½ staff.
