So one of the more curious parts of Justice Minister Rob Nicholson's latest missive to the Ethics committee on its report on access to information reform -- which can basically be summed up as, "We'll get back to you" -- was the passing reference to a discussion paper on the subject that the government had apparently tabled back in 2006. When it came up during this morning's meeting, at least a few committee members were left scratching their heads in bemusement, and wondering just he was talking about, since nobody seemed to remember having actually read it.

Well, it took a bit of strategic googling, but it turns out that the discussion paper does, in fact, exist -- on the Department of Justice website, no less. Although undated, it appears to have been tabled in April 2006, just about the same time that the Federal Accountability Act was introduced.

Among the perennial recommendations for reform that it seems to all but dismiss out of hand: extending the ATIA to cover ministers' offices; giving the information commissioner limited power to review cabinet confidences, and tightening up exemption claims in general. In general, it has a distinctly more cautious, downright bureaucratic tone than the Conservatives' 2006 platform, in which the prime minister promised that his government would:
 

•Implement the Information Commissioner's recommendations for reform of the Access to Information Act.
• Give the Information Commissioner the power to order the release of information.
• Expand the coverage of the act to all Crown corporations, Officers of Parliament, foundations, and organizations that spend taxpayers' money or perform public functions.
• Subject the exclusion of Cabinet confidences to review by the Information Commissioner.
• Oblige public officials to create the records necessary to document their actions and decisions.
• Provide a general public interest override for all exemptions, so that the public interest is put before the secrecy of the government.
• Ensure that all exemptions from the disclosure of government information are justified only on the basis of the harm or injury that would result from disclosure, not blanket exemption rules.
• Ensure that the disclosure requirements of the Access to Information Act cannot be circumvented by secrecy provisions in other federal acts, while respecting the confidentiality of national security and the privacy of personal information.

It didn't take long for those idealistic opposition views to fall in line with Sir Humphrey's position on open government: "You can be open, or you can have a government." Still, it will be interesting to hear what the justice minister has to say when he goes before the committee to explain why he thinks his own party's election promises on access reform just aren't a priority for his government.