Ancient software cited for RCMP's access-to-info failures

Internal audit regurgitates well-studied problems

The RCMP has a venerable history of flouting the Access to Information Act, invoking excessive redactions and imposing delays that too often violate the letter of the law.

Canada’s information commission raps the RCMP’s knuckles every few years and they always promise to do better. But like clockwork, they soon fall back into bad habits. Requestors who deal regularly with the RCMP learn to live with constant disappointment, and quickly become cynical about real or lasting reform.

A newly released internal audit explains in part why the RCMP sucks so badly at transparency: their software for processing access-to-information requests is antediluvian, next to useless, and on its last legs. Actually, that last part may be a blessing.

As of next year, the program - Access Pro Case Management - will be an orphan because the vendor will stop supporting it. The RCMP needs at least $6.5 million for a new system but, in the bloodless words of the auditors, “a sustained funding source … has not been identified.” In other words, the cupboard is bare.

The finding is a lowlight of the Audit of Document Management and Production Processes, completed in March but posted online only in August.

The audit was a direct response to the Mass Casualty Commission, which investigated a horrific mass killing in Nova Scotia in spring 2020. Twenty-two people were murdered at gunpoint by a man masquerading as an RCMP officer, using uniforms and a fake police cruiser.

The commission issued 130 recommendations, most of which faulted the RCMP for incompetence and blind spots, both of which proved lethal. One of the recommendations, No. 128, called for an “external independent audit” of the way the force organizes and produces documents, because extracting RCMP evidence for the commission to inspect was a hot mess. Just as in access-to-info, the force was late to deliver, or couldn’t find material, or didn’t record essential evidence. (See my previous substack on officer note-taking for examples of the problems.)

The RCMP did conduct the audit, from October 2023 to August 2024. But the force rejected the stipulation that it had to be external and independent, claiming an internal audit was sufficient.

The audit’s conclusion was that RCMP documentation systems “may” be inefficient, difficult and delayed, an observation already well established by the Mass Casualty Commission. “May” is the word you get when the analysis is an inside job.

The internal report found that 63 per cent of the force’s information-management money went into “sustaining legacy services,” versus only 16 per cent on new ones. Training was inadequate. There was a lack of automation and record tracking.

The branch that processes Access to Information Act requests was cited as one of the worst examples of information mismanagement.

Access Pro, developed by a private-sector firm more than two decades ago, can’t communicate with other government document systems. As a result: “Most of ATIP Branch’s work is manual in nature …”

“Access Pro Case Management response times are contributing to production delays as this software is out-of-date, is slow for searching … and loading information, and contains duplication,” says the report.

“Additionally, Access Pro Case Management does not allow analysts to sort files based on the earliest action date. Instead, they must check each file individually in order to determine which files need attention.”

None of this is new. Canada’s information commissioner, Caroline Maynard, reported on these problems at the RCMP in November 2020, including on the antiquated software. So the latest audit simply recycles the same well-known failings, and the same familiar promises of reform, six years later.

The fact it was an in-house investigation - contrary to the Mass Casualty Commission’s request - means we’re likely still on the hamster wheel, going round and round, with endless delays and redactions and no meaningful prospect for reform.

Come to think of it, maybe that’s the point.