Article content continued

More bothersome is cool, efficient Lajoie, who must have staggered under the weight of the ATI files — mine as well as those of others — she brought with her to the interview. She tells the cops what I knew — that my many ATI requests yielded almost nothing because DND officials always found some clause in the Act allowing them to “protect” or “sever” the documents. Lajoie goes on to make it clear that, if there is no obvious reason to withhold potentially damaging information, her job is to go looking for one.

Rider’s article noted that Lajoie went on to describe how eight senior officials in the Canadian Forces had the job of examining every one of his Access to Information requests and gutting them of information.

Like with the recent Access to Information boondoggle at the Judge Advocate General’s Office, singling out clerks or lower-ranked soldiers to take the fall was also a feature in the 1990s scandals.

Take the 1996 case of Lt.-Gen. Armand Roy, then the third highest ranking officer in the military. He was dismissed from the Canadian Forces after discrepancies were found in his expense accounts. Roy had to pay back between $70,000 and $80,000. Among those discrepancies that I reported at the time was that Roy billed taxpayers for a house-hunting trip to the Ottawa area even though he already owned a home there.

It was military finance clerks who first warned the Canadian Forces leadership about widespread irregularities in senior officers’ hotel and travel claims. A general then investigated those irregularities and found that Roy was entitled to his entitlements. The clerks continued with their warnings. Esprit de Corps magazine reported on the case. The Auditor General got involved. Roy’s career was done and he was dismissed from the Canadian Forces. But he was allowed to retire with a full pension.