Speaker of the House of Commons Anthony Rota looks on during Question Period in the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on June 16. The Speaker said all MPs, regardless of which party they are from, have a right to expect full and factual responses to requests for information from the government.Justin Tang/The Canadian Press
Federal public servants worked on ways not to answer directly opposition MPs’ parliamentary questions, admitting that doing so raised a communication risk, internal government documents obtained under access to information show.
Civil servants in the Natural Resources Department recommended the use of “limitation language” to answer the written Commons questions from Conservative and NDP MPs, internal e-mails show.
The revelation prompted Commons Speaker Anthony Rota to issue a rebuke Tuesday over the failure to fully answer written questions, saying more and more MPs were complaining about the quality of replies.
He said all MPs, regardless of which party they are from, have a right to expect full and factual responses to requests for information from the government.
MPs deserved accurate answers “regardless of their name, reputation or political affiliation,” Mr. Rota said. “Written questions and the responses to them are central parts of the process of accountability,” he added.
MPs often table written questions to get information from the government, which has to respond within 45 days. But this week Tory MPs expressed dismay after internal e-mails, obtained through access to information, suggested politically neutral public servants had used evasive tactics when replying to their questions.
Calgary Conservative Michelle Rempel Garner tabled an access request after one of her questions to the Natural Resources Department was not completely answered. She asked for details about the U.S. military funding mining projects.
One Natural Resources official approving the response to Ms. Rempel Garner wrote: “Response does not answer questions directly, but provides a response to the spirit of the questions. PAU has confirmed that this approach is appropriate.”
Opposition MPs call on government to fix broken access to information system
The MP says she was shocked to discover that dozens of federal officials had been consulted in drawing up the response, including those from the communications department. Her question was branded “high risk” and the reply was framed using existing “media lines” used to respond to journalists.
The internal e-mails showed public servants referred to her position as a former opposition critic when framing the reply, saying because she was an “effective communicator” it raised a risk of her highlighting their failure to fully answer her question.
“There is some communications risk resulting from the use of high-level limitation language that does not answer the written question from an MP who is an effective communicator and former Natural resources critic,” says the communication assessment of Natural Resources’ response to Ms. Rempel Garner’s question.
The e-mails also discuss the prospect of the Speaker of the House of Commons ruling on the issue of her unanswered question.
“I’m expecting the Speaker to tut tut and then say it is not for him to judge the quality of a response but we will see,” said an e-mail from Kyle Harrietha, who is deputy chief of staff to the Natural Resources Minister.
Ms. Rempel Garner said the documents made it “very clear they factored in my partisan position” when preparing the reply to her question.
The internal e-mails include a table of questions to the Natural Resources Minister from MPs, including Conservatives Garnett Genuis, Dan Albas and NDP MP Blake Desjarlais, who asked about funding for First Nations. The communication assessments reveal that “limitation language” was used in framing their replies.
Mr. Albas told The Globe that replies are meant to be “fact-based” and it was wrong for government officials to apply a “communications lens” to responses.
One Natural Resources document discusses its response to the question from Mr. Albas.
“NRCan [Natural Resources Canada’s] answer uses limitation language and does not disclose specific cancelled contracts from the time period requested,” it says. “Communications risk appears low and depends on whether NRCan stands out among all departments answering.”
Conservative MPs Shannon Stubbs and Brad Redekopp also raised concerns Tuesday in the Commons about incomplete replies from government departments to their written questions, including those seeking facts to help their constituents.
Mr. Rota said the comments of public servants involved in replying to MPs’ questions, disclosed under access to information, were “troubling.”
The Speaker said he had noticed that MPs are questioning more and more the quality of answers to their questions. He urged ministers “to find the right words to inspire their officials to invest their time and energy in preparing high-quality responses, rather than looking for reasons to avoid answering written questions.”
A spokesman for Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson said he had responded to Ms. Rempel Garner’s question about mineral projects active in Canada.
“The Minister did so in a way that adhered to the advice provided to him by officials with respect to sensitive information involving international affairs and defence, scientific and technical information, commercial sensitivity, and ongoing negotiations,” said Keean Nembhard, the minister’s spokesman.
In the Senate, Conservative Leader Don Plett said he has been waiting since 2020 for answers to some of his written questions. He accused the government of a disregard for “proper parliamentary process.”