The Canadian Civil Liberties Association told federal members of Parliament today it is “deeply disappointed” with the Trudeau government’s bill that seeks to amend federal access-to-information laws, arguing the bill falls short of the widespread reform that’s needed and introduces new barriers for Canadians who want to access government records.

In a testimony before the parliamentary ethics committee today, Cara Zwibel, the CCLA’s acting general counsel, said the few steps forward made by the proposed legislation, Bill C-58, are curtailed by other new provisions. She pointed to new order-making powers the bill gives the federal information commissioner to force departments to release information and documents — saying this authority is no great gain for the commissioner since the bill in its current form would allow a department to seek judicial review of such an order in Federal Court.

Zwibel also criticized the government’s failure to make the offices of the prime minister and cabinet ministers subject to the Access to Information Act – something the Liberals promised to do during the 2015 election campaign. The government has instead touted a obligation it included in the bill which it calls “proactive disclosure,” which requires ministers’ offices to release predominantly financial information like travel and hospitality expenses.

Zwibel said the idea of proactive disclosure is good in principle but is “not a substitute for a strong access scheme” and ultimately “lets the government decide what Canadians can see.” She said the proactive disclosure provision is “subject to no oversight” and the bill does not codify any penalties or consequences for those who fail to abide by the new proactive disclosure rules.

“(Bill C-58) is not the comprehensive reform that is needed and it is frankly no answer to say that more is coming down the road,” Zwibel told MPs Monday. “We have been studying the need for a new regime for many years and have benefitted from this committee’s own study and comprehensive recommendations. Now is the time for action.

“This is not the open and transparent government that Canadians want and deserve.”

The Liberals tabled Bill C-58 mid-June, shortly before Parliament adjourned for the summer, offering it up as the first meaningful reform of the Access to Information Act since it became law in 1983. The bill also would legislate a review of the act one year after it passes, and subsequently every five years.

Blowback to the legislation was swift and fierce, with politicians, media organizations and other observers hammering the Liberals over their broken pledge to bring ministerial offices within the act’s coverage. Information Commissioner Suzanne Legault also blasted Bill C-58 in a report she tabled in late September, saying it “fails to deliver.”

“After studying the Bill, I have concluded that the proposed amendments to the Access to Information Act will not advance government transparency,” Legault wrote in a statement released alongside the report. “The proposed Bill fails to deliver on the government’s promises. If passed, it would result in a regression of existing rights.”

Legault also proposed 28 amendments to the bill in her report.

On Monday, the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics also heard from Duff Conacher, co-founder of advocacy group Democracy Watch; Peter Di Gangi, director of policy and research at National Claims Research Directors; Heather Scoffield, editor-in-chief of The Canadian Press; and Gordon McIntosh, director at the Canadian Committee for World Press Freedom, who appeared on behalf of Canadian Journalists for Free Expression.

Conacher, Scoffield and McIntosh echoed many of the same concerns that have been voiced since June and those Zwibel expressed at committee.

In his testimony, Conacher said Bill C-58 “takes big steps backwards in access rights” and urged MPs to implement a public safety override similar to those present in access-to-information laws in British Columbia and Alberta. Conacher also said he wants to see the federal government increase funding to solve request backlogs and establish “severe penalties” for subpar maintenance of records and for “unjustifiable delays for responses to requests.”

“The Access To Information Act is just nice words on paper,” Conacher said. “Enforcement is key and penalties are key in terms of effective enforcement.”

Di Gangi, who works on First Nations claims against the Government of Canada, spoke specifically to how he believes bill would interfere with the access rights of First Nations.

“The majority of information in these cases are held by the Crown … there’s an inherent conflict of interest there,” Di Gangi said. “We’re opposed to the bill … it’s a bad bill.”

Di Gangi also claimed Bill C-58 “breaches” a list of 10 principles the federal justice minister released in the summer that she said would guide Ottawa’s efforts to decolonize federal laws and policies.

“Our concern is that this government set a very high bar with regards to relations with Indigenous peoples … and it appears to have broken that bar with this bill,” he said.

The parliamentary ethics committee began its study of Bill C-58 last week. On Wednesday, amid criticism that the bill gives a federal department the power to decline a request it deems “frivolous and vexatious,” Treasury Board President Scott Brison told MPs the government is open to giving the information commissioner the authority to first make that determination.

Minister of Democratic Institutions Karina Gould also appeared before the committee alongside Brison.