The quote from me in the previous article missed one important piece:
“I don’t understand why they won’t do it. And I think it was a big mistake,” said Mitchell, who noted that an access-to-information request can “take an awful lot of time.”
I don’t understand. And I do think it was a mistake. But the biggest part of why I think it was a mistake is because I honestly don’t think we have too many issues with expenses. I think the perception is *way* worse than the reality. And that by publishing them, we would positively adjust that perception.
And as regards the access-to-information requests – the issue there is that some people around the table suggested that it would take too much time to post expense accounts. If done properly, it should take all of maybe … 10 minutes a month. If that much. A single access-to-information request obliterates that time investment. We suddenly have the Secretary General involved in a legal capacity with an access-to-information request. And then what about when we have multiple requests for the same information? A great big hassle. And time. And waste. And for what?
So yes, I don’t understand and I think it was a mistake. And I hope this makes it crystal clear as to why think so.
-nb- I guess the whole “no one is interested” and “it’s not an issue” questions have truly been answered now. Lester B. comes off looking good. And it could have applied to us too. How disappointing is *that*?