Ottawa light rail investigation: ‘key documents’ to be made public

The Commission’s mandate is to get answers for the people of Ontario about what happened at Project TLRO1 and how we can prevent these problems from happening again. All participants should be committed to getting these answers, and it should be clear to them that solutions will not be found if thousands of relevant documents are discarded.end of the commissioner.

IO Argued that his arguments meet the confidentiality standards established by law in the Ontario case, according to the organization.

These three criteria include:

• that the party seeking the confidentiality of certain documents in the context of a commission of inquiry must establish that their disclosure would pose a serious risk to the public interest;
• that no reasonable alternative can prevent this risk;
• proportionally, the benefits of confidentiality outweigh its negative effects.

The position ofIO has no merit and undermines the very raison d’être of this Inquiry the judge’s summary of his 13-page decision released Monday.

There is no legal basis for the confidentiality claims ofIO about the documents goes to the heart of the Inquirycontinued Mr. Hourigan. Access this request […] would unreasonably violate the public’s right to information.

Information commercially sensitiveaccording to IO

The documents covered by the request forIO are Categories 1 and 2, ie retrieval documents and documents from Government advice.

For retrieval documents, IO claimed that confidentiality agreements were signed with some advocates. The organization then indicated that it was tied to them according to a government directive. The entity also claimed that there was a ongoing obligation under the law and common law to protect confidential business information provided by a third party during the acquisition process, read Commissioner Hourigan’s decision.

Regarding the writings of Government advice, IO that is controversial the disclosure of Class 2 confidential documents to the public and other participants will be in the interest of the province and the public interest in a transparent, efficient and neutral public service.

A public inquiry under the sign of publicity of debates

Commissioner Hourigan also denied the arguments ofIO by using the general principle of publicity of debates.

Both the Supreme Court of Canada and the Court of Appeals of Ontario have emphasized the increased public interest in public hearings of a public inquiry compared to other court proceedings.he explains.

The Public Inquiries Act 2009 gives the Commission broad powers to subpoena witnesses and disclose informationallowing him to obtain documents that would otherwise be considered confidential.

The order constituting the Commission of Inquiry gives the mandate to investigate the commercial and technical circumstances leading to breakdowns and derailment light rail. A public and proper inquiry into the matters set forth in the Act requires consideration of the advice given by IO in the city and province.

” The purpose of public inquiry is to “fix the truth” through public hearings and restore public confidence not only in the institution or situation under investigation, but also in the entire state apparatus. “

Since its work began in January 2022, the CERTLRO is said to have received more than a million documents from various parties. He estimates that more than 10,000 are related to his mandate.

The CERTLRO was established in December 2021 to shed light on numerous issues with Ottawa Light Rail that have caused numerous service delays since its launch in 2019.