 Custom Search  How Many Photo Tickets Will It Take Before You Fight Back? GPS is 100% Legal and Pays For Itself. Click Here To Learn More. Access Audit Confirms City Of Winnipeg Hides Behind FIPPAACCESS AUDITS: Information doesn’t come cheapBy: Mary Agnes Welch (Winnipeg Free Press Jan. 10/09) WINNIPEG and Brandon charge big bucks for public documents that other Canadian cities provide for free, according to a new national audit on access to information released Friday. Winnipeg scored a mediocre C in the audit, largely because it levied fees before answering two of the five questions posed by researchers.
Brandon fared even worse, scoring a D+. That city charged fees worth hundreds of dollars for most of the requests. Just getting a list of Mayor Dave Burgess’s out-of-province trips costs $780. The scores are part of a national audit done annually by the Canadian Newspaper Association to gauge how stingy governments are with information or how slow they are to release it. The Winnipeg Free Press is a member of the CNA. The audit found that 40 per cent of the time, governments failed to release information in the 30-day period set out by law. It also found that fees vary wildly throughout the country. What one government releases in full and for free, another will keep secret or charge hundreds of dollars to compile and photocopy. That makes it difficult for average citizens to get access to information that ought to be public. “What could possibly affect the rights of citizens more than how police use a potentially deadly weapon?” asked University of King’s College journalism Prof. Fred Vallance-Jones, who wrote the report for the CNA. “That’s a matter of basic public accountability. To levy a fee of nearly $5,000 as the price of admission effectively bars access to all but the wealthiest requester.” Marc Lemoine, Winnipeg’s deputy clerk, said the city levies the fees for staff time and copying set out in provincial access legislation, and works with the public to whittle down big requests so people get the information they are seeking without spending a lot of money. Fees can be appealed to the Manitoba Ombudsman. Lemoine said the city got 183 requests in 2007 and released information in all but 28 requests. The national audit also found that governments were stuck in the last century and mired in paper. Many refused to release information in electronic format via email or CD, even though the information existed in such a format. Manitoba, which has traditionally fared well in the national audit, scored a B+, the second-best province in the survey. But it did deny access to ministerial briefing notes on carbon taxes, as many other province’s did. Reports prepared for ministers have always been kept secret in Manitoba, though provinces such as Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island appear more willing to release what Manitoba terms “advice to government.” Colin Craig, Manitoba director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, said he tends to see big fees charged more often by the provincial government than by the city. The CTF makes dozens of requests a year, and a recent one for information about holiday bonuses paid to staff at Family Services and Housing came back with a $4,500 price tag. The Guru's Response. (also posted at WPG F.P.) The City and Police Service use The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA) as a shield to discourage persons and agencies from accessing information that will be an embarrassment to them. Case is point, in preparing information for an upcoming special report on Photo Enforcement, how it's flawed and targets good drivers who will pay the tickets and leaves bad drivers unaccountable. The only place we have been blocked with FIPPA has been the City of Winnipeg. Other agencies like MPI, WCB, Manitoba or Federal Governments have all been forthcoming with no charge for the information and either mailed the data out or sent it via email. An initial request for the following information was sent to the WPS via their website at the beginning of August 2008,
Some of this information (ie:how many mobile units and operators) is simple to provide an answer to. Some of the other information would only require some basic computer stats queries to get the result. This request went unanswered and it wasn't until notifying the Police Chief at the end of September that a response was finally sent on the 20th of October. This response was to fill out the FIPPA form submit it, they will advise me of the cost involved and upon payment information will be forwarded.
So the question that needs to be asked is, What is the City scared of? Why not just be transparent? Is it because the Photo Enforcement Program is really about revenue? The fact that the first contract with ACS (the camera operator) is protected by a $10,000.00 fee says it all. This is the contract that was criticized by a 2006 City Audit into the program. Of course we will refuse to pay any fee for information which should be public. Instead we will let the City's silence speak for itself and will gather the information we need through other sources.
This is not a problem exclusive to Winnipeg either. It's interesting though that in a time of economic uncertainty that the City to date has paid a FOR PROFIT company approx $40 million dollars while they have only made a fraction themselves. ACS only employs 13 people locally and does not appear to invest or donate locally. Where is that money from our economy going? Photo Enforcement is not working, it does not increase safety and targets the wrong people. Do you trust a system that uses a portion of the money generated to promote itself and tell the citizens how well it's doing? If the information we are providing is inaccurate then the City is free to disclose the actual information and prove us wrong. Larry Stefanuik Back to top of page. Back to The Guru's Views
|
