As we mentioned in one of updates last year, we sent out a couple of Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) requests that we believe are important to making out Dana’s Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) complaint. We feel these ATIPs may prove the systemic claim that peer-to-peer gender-based harassment, and discrimination has/is/will continue against Women within the CCG as the organization was, and continues to be, incapable of actioning these under its broken system.
Last month, we shared with you the results we received for the first ATIP request, wherein Derek Moss admitted to those attending the Annual Diversity Symposium, that the Canadian Coast Guards (CCG) zero tolerance for peer-to-peer gender-based harassment, bullying and violence and its policies for addressing same are ineffective. He acknowledged that the CCG may soon be facing its “me too” moment. Via the ATIP process, we now have in hand, documentation that states this.
Our second ATIP request asked for the documents associated with the “Atlantic incident”. We were told by sources, that this event prompted Chris Henderson, the Deputy Commissioner of Operations to call an impromptu meeting with Women in fleet in the Western Regional to gauge and hear about their experiences with peer-on-peer harassment. We sought documents about this via ATIP given its relevance to the systemic claim. This information would help corroborate to the scope of harassment, bullying and peer on peer violence within the CCG – which we believe is widespread.
If the information we receive about the “Atlantic incident” is as concerning as we believe it is – as it did in fact prompt Henderson to travel across the country to meet with Women in Fleet – it will support our request to have the CHRC action Dana’s complaint as a public interest matter. In our view, it is important to get to the bottom of what went on there.
We are still waiting for the response to our second ATIP request. On December 19th, 2023, the CCG unilaterally sought an extension to this request. We provided NO indicia agreeing to this. We took a wait and see position to see if the Fisheries’ Access to Information Office would continue to action this second request promptly and reasonably. That has unfortunately not been the case. Since the extension request, six (6) weeks have passed. During that time, here has been absolute radio silence. “Nada” has come out of Fisheries’ ATIP office.
The delay in receiving a response to our request has us scratching our heads. We think there may be strong nexus between what that information contains relative to the systemic concerns of Dana’s complaint. In relation to this second request, we think “there is a there there”. Why else would it be taking so long to action?
Next week, it seems likely that we will have to launch a direct complaint with the Information Commissioner. This is now authorized under Bill C-58, which was an Act which amended the Access to Information and Privacy Act. The Commissioner now may make binding orders in relation to access requests, including the release of government records after receiving and deciding upon a complaint filed by a requestor. [1] No need to seek enforcement under the Federal Court Act.
In closing, we continue to work on this with vigor. Big thanks for your continued support. We are pleased to share that the website is also doing its job, is for the most part working well and acts as a safe place for those interested getting accurate news on the progress of this matter.
___________________________________________________
[1] For further information on this see https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/access-information-privacy/access-information-act.html