ARCHIVED - Access to Information and Privacy Acts
Annual Reports

WarningThis page has been archived.

Archived Content

Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.



April 1, 2005 - March 31, 2006

Table of contents

Introduction

The Access to Information Act (ATIA) and the Privacy Act (PA) were proclaimed into force on July 1, 1983.

The ATIA gives Canadian citizens, permanent residents and any person and corporation present in Canada a right of access to information contained in government records, subject to certain specific and limited exceptions. The PA extends to individuals the right of access to information about themselves held by the government, subject to specific and limited exceptions. The latter Act also protects the individuals' privacy by preventing others from having access to their personal information and gives individuals substantial control over its collection, use and disclosure.

Section 72 of the ATIA and Section 72 of the PA require that the head of every government institution prepare for submission to Parliament an annual report on the administration of the Acts within the institution during each financial year.

The following annual reports are intended to describe how the Public Service Commission of Canada administered its responsibilities in the fiscal year 2005-2006 in relation to these Acts.

Part I — General Information on the Public Service Commission

Mission, Vision and Values - Striving for Excellence

The Public Service Commission (PSC) is dedicated to building a public service that strives for excellence. We protect merit, non-partisanship, representativeness and the use of both official languages.

We safeguard the integrity of staffing in the public service and the political impartiality of public servants. We develop policies and guidance for public service managers and hold them accountable for their staffing decisions. We conduct audits and investigations to confirm the effectiveness of the staffing system and to make improvements. As an independent agency, we report our results to Parliament.

We recruit talented Canadians to the public service, drawn from across the country. We continually renew our recruitment services to meet the needs of a modern and innovative public service.

Values to Guide our Actions

In serving Parliament and Canadians, the PSC is guided by and proudly adhere to the following organizational values:

  • Integrity in our actions;
  • Fairness in our decisions;
  • Respect in our relationships; and
  • Transparency in our communications.

Our Mandate

The PSC is an independent agency reporting to Parliament, with the authority to make appointments to and within the public service. To ensure that Canadians continue to benefit from a public service that is representative of Canada's diversity and based on competence, merit and non-partisanship, the PSC assures that these public service values are safeguarded.

The mandate of the Commission is provided for in the Public Service Employment Act ( PSEA s. 11). It is namely responsible for:

  • appointing, or providing for the appointment of, persons to or from within the public service in accordance with the PSEA;
  • conducting investigations and audits in accordance with the PSEA;
  • administering the provisions of the PSEA relating to political activities of employees and deputy heads;
  • performing any functions in relation to the public service that are assigned by the Governor in Council.

Under the new PSEA, which came into force on December 31, 2005, the PSC's mandate for oversight of a more flexible, delegated appointment system has been enhanced.

Access to Information and Privacy Activities

The Departmental Coordinator of Access to Information and Privacy is accountable for the development, coordination and implementation of effective policies, guidelines, systems and procedures to enable efficient processing of requests under the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act. The Coordinator is also responsible for related policies, systems and procedures emanating from the Acts, such as the government's policy on information collection and public opinion research.

The activities of the Access to Information and Privacy office include:

  • processing requests under both Acts;
  • acting as spokesperson for the Public Service Commission in dealings with the Treasury Board Secretariat, the Information and Privacy Commissioners, and other government departments and agencies regarding the application of both Acts as they relate to the PSC;
  • responding to consultation requests submitted by other federal institutions on PSC documents located in their files while processing their requests;
  • reviewing and approving information collections in accordance with the Government Policy on Information Collection and Public Opinion Research;
  • implementing and promoting the use of the Treasury Board Privacy Impact Assessment Policy;
  • preparing annual reports to Parliament and other statutory reports, as well as other material that may be required by central agencies;
  • developing policies, procedures and guidelines for the orderly implementation of both Acts by the PSC;
  • promoting awareness of both Acts to ensure the PSC's responsiveness to the obligations imposed on the government;
  • monitoring the PSC's compliance with both Acts, regulations and relevant procedures and policies; and
  • providing advice and awareness sessions on the provisions of both Acts to PSC managers regarding the impact of various program initiatives.

Part II — Report on the Access to Information Act

Highlights

During the reporting period of April 1, 2005 to March 31, 2006, the Public Service Commission (PSC) received a total of 98 new requests under the ATIA. Four requests were carried over from the previous year. The number of requests has increased since last year from 67 to 98.

Again this year, the requests received covered the entire range of the PSC's responsibilities as the Parliamentary agency responsible for the safeguarding of the integrity of the appointment process. More specifically:

  • 35 requests (36%) related to contracts, call-ups for temporary help, lists of new term and casual employees, and telecommunications.
  • 27 requests (28%) dealt with miscellaneous issues, one of which was for the external audit conducted by the Audit Branch on the Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP.
  • 17 requests (17%) touched on staffing operations including staffing for executive level positions and priority administrative files. Other requests dealt with statistics related to the administration of staffing delegation, establishment of tests and standards for selection, and Employment Equity initiatives.
  • 14 requests (14%) pertained to recourse issues, all of which sought information related to investigations, appeal decisions and transcriptions of cassettes used during the appeal hearing.
  • 5 requests (5%) pertained to various tests, evaluations and assessments done by the PSC. Most of the requests were asking for statistical data concerning language testing issues.

As was the case last year, the preferred method of access reported by the PSC, as well as by departments and agencies throughout the federal government, is to receive copies of government records as opposed to simply viewing them.

Of the 94 cases completed during the reporting period, 78 requests (83%) were completed within 30 days, eight (9%) within 31 to 60 days, seven (7%) were completed between 61 to 120 days, and one request was completed in 198 days (1%). Although the PSC saw its number of requests increase, the PSC responded to 99% of the requests within the legislative time frame.

Two complaints were received from the Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC) during this reporting period. One was resolved and considered well founded; the PSC could not locate a piece of correspondence the applicant had provided the PSC during an investigation in 2002. The OIC did find the information, and the ATIP Office later provided it to the applicant. The second complaint was on the ATIP Office's use of extension of time. The OIC investigator concluded that the ATIP Office extension was necessary and complied with the ATIA. The complaint was unfounded. One complaint, carried from 2003-2004, was deemed well-founded. The applicant had not been provided with all the information during the initial release; records were later found and provided to the applicant.

It should also be noted that the PSC received 36 consultations from other government departments and agencies. After reviewing the files, the PSC determined that information pertaining to the PSC could be released in full in 27 of the 36 consultation requests. Institutions consulted the PSC on matters relating to the Public Service Modernisation Act (PSMA), PSEA, staffing and priority administration files, second language evaluation and briefing books.

The PSC also undertook numerous consultations with other government departments. The large majority of these consultations were taken with the Public Service Human Resources Management Agency of Canada and the Canada School of Public Service.

The Access to Information and Privacy office has continued to maintain its role of providing advice and training on the provisions of the ATIA to PSC managers regarding the impact of various program initiatives. This year, seven ATIP awareness sessions were provided to PSC staff. The awareness sessions were provided to some of PSC's regions (Vancouver, Edmonton, Winnipeg and Toronto), Delegation Directorate and the Personnel Psychology Centre. There were a total of 130 employees briefed, representing more then 10% of the PSC population. The ATIP Office also made a presentation to the ATIP Coordinators (representing over 70 federal institutions) on privacy implications pertaining to the new PSEA. With regards to advice provided to PSC managers, the ATIP Office was consulted over 100 times during the year on topics ranging from political activities, the PSMA, the new PSEA and its regulations, investigations under the new PSEA and recourse files.

The ATIP Office was consulted twelve times on the release of records within the PSC on reports such as internal audits, human resources files, PSC operational files and human resources planning.

Appendix A: Statistics - Access to Information Act

Part III — Report on the Privacy Act

Highlights

During the reporting period of April 1, 2005 to March 31, 2006, the Public Service Commission (PSC) received a total of 41 requests under the PA. Two requests were carried over from 2004-2005. The number of requests received was consistent with last year's figures.

This year, the requests covered the following range of activities:

  • 23 (56%) pertained to staffing-related activities. The majority of these requests dealt with individuals seeking their personal information contained in competition files, priority administration files, or test results obtained during the assessment part of a competition. Seven requests were either abandoned or records were not found because the requesters thought that the PSC was responsible for staffing all positions in the public service.
  • 8 requests (20%) dealt with individuals seeking their own personal information on miscellaneous issues.
  • 7 requests (17%) were from individuals seeking information contained in investigation and appeal files held by the former Recourse Branch (now Investigations Branch).
  • 3 requests (7%) pertained to individuals seeking feedback regarding their own Second Language Evaluation.

Of the 39 cases completed during the reporting period, 30 (77%) requests were completed within 30 days, seven (18%) within 31 to 60 days and two (5%) within 61 to 120 days. Of the 39 requests, 37 were completed within their legislative time period (95% compliance rate). Of the two late files, one was completed on day 61 as opposed to day 60.

There were a total of eleven complaints received by the Privacy Commissioner during this reporting period. There were two related to delay/extension and two for refusal of access. The other seven complaints alleged improper disclosure of personal information contained in appeal files, PSC audits, and the Canada Gazette.

There were six Privacy complaints closed during this reporting period. Of the six, two were allegations of delay in responding and unauthorised extension of time. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner (OPC) investigator concluded that the ATIP Office responded within the legislative time lines and that the extension was necessary and complied with the PA. The two complaints were unfounded. One complaint was carried over from 2002, the OPC concluded that it was settled in the course of investigation. The three remaining complaints on improper disclosure of personal information contained in a PSC Audit were well-founded. In response to the three complaints, the Audit Branch now consults with the ATIP Office prior to disclosure to determine if section 8(5) of the PA is required. The ATIP Office has since reviewed two audits during this reporting period.

Consultations were conducted with several government departments, mostly with regards to priority administration files, recourse, investigations and competitive processes. The PSC received three consultations from other institutions and recommended full disclosure in all three cases.

As discussed in the Access to Information section of this report, the ATIP Office has continued to maintain its role of providing advice and training on the provisions of the PA to PSC managers regarding the impact of various program initiatives.

Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) and Preliminary Privacy Impact Assessment (PPIA)

PIA on Priority Information Management System for the Priority Administration Section of the Delegation Directorate, Policy Branch (started in 2004-2005, submitted to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner with a Threat Risk Assessment (TRA) and action plan in June of 2006)

Executive Summary

The Policy Branch supports the Public Service Commission's mandate to independently safeguard the integrity of staffing and promote the political impartiality of the public service.

The Public Service Employment Act (PSEA)and Regulations (PSER) provide certain persons with an entitlement, for limited periods, to be appointed ahead of all others to any position in the public service for which they are qualified. An entitlement is a personal right guaranteed by the PSEA and PSER, and is an exception to the normal application of the merit principle. It applies to all positions regardless of department, location, tenure, occupation and most selection processes. Entitlements are normally the result of actions in which the department is directly involved, for example, authorizing certain leaves of absence, backfilling the position of an employee on leave, and/or declaring employees surplus or laid-off.

The entitlement of priority persons is to be appointed, without competition, in absolute priority (before all other persons), to positions for which they are qualified, unless their appointment would result in another person becoming entitled to a priority (i.e. declared surplus). Priority persons must simply be qualified for a position, not necessarily the best qualified among other interested persons, in order to be entitled to be appointed. Priority appointments are not subject to appeal.

Priority entitlements apply to most appointments that are made pursuant to the PSEA. The entitlement is national and interdepartmental in scope. Priority entitlements do not apply to deployments, secondments/assignments, acting appointments, casual appointments, and most appointments made according to individual merit. Departments are obligated to make priority appointments before conducting recruitment or internal staffing actions.

The PSC is in the process of implementing the Priority Information Management System (PIMS), a national, interdepartmental and web-based inventory that matches priority persons with vacant positions. The PIMS lists registered priority persons in an inventory, which is then searched by departments as a first step in staffing or recruitment.

The PIMS replaces the Integrated Staffing System used by the PSC Priority Officers and the internet-based forms that departmental staffing personnel have been utilizing in the priority entitlement process.

As the PIMS involves personal information related to the priority persons, this Report examines the privacy-related impact of the PIMS, and proposes appropriate mitigation strategies for the identified risks.

Public Service Resourcing System (PSRS) for the Services Branch (PIA and TRA were conducted during the current reporting period. The Action Plan will be prepared in 2006-2007)

Executive Summary

The Public Service of Canada receives hundreds of thousands of applications every year. Managing such a large volume of resumes is cumbersome and has been handled in a variety of ways by the various hiring departments across the public service. The primary process used has been manual in nature which does not address the needs of users. Additionally, such processes will not be able to address the expected increase in applications received, by the coming into force of the National Area of Selection policy, nor will it comply with the modernized resource approach mandated by the Public Service Modernization Act.

The primary purpose of the Public Service Resourcing System (PSRS) is to improve the process of recruiting outside of the public service. PSRS allows hiring agents to create customized job applications and advertisements for positions that need to be filled. The Canadian public can, in turn, view and apply for these postings and the system will use its automated screening functionality to provide departmental hiring managers with a filtered set of referrals.

Currently, the administrator portion of the application is only accessible to PSC users. PSC HR consultants and/or HR assistants work with client departments to create advertisements and manage the referral process. As of April 2006, however, certain other government departments will be able to use the PSRS system to directly advertise external positions, develop questionnaires, and screen referrals.

The PIA examines the privacy-related impact of the PSRS and proposes appropriate mitigation strategies for the identified risks. The personal information that will be managed by the PSRS includes:

  • Administrator contact information;
  • Hiring manager and HR Officer contact information;
  • Applicant test information;
  • Applicant personal and contact information;
  • Applicant education and resume related information; and
  • Applicant employment equity information (self-disclosed).

N6 Application for the Information Integration Division of the PSC: (A PPIA and TRA were conducted over this reporting period, it was determined that a PIA is required and will be conducted during the 2006-2007 fiscal year)

Executive Summary

N6 is a software designed to deal with qualitative analysis. In addition to its strengths, it merges different textual sources and develops qualitative databases. N6 is also able to produce tables that integrate qualitative and quantitative information. Hence, it provides efficient and quick cross-referencing and comparison of key information to be used by different key players within the PSC when dealing with staffing issues.

With the coming into force of the new PSEA on December 31st, 2005, the PSC needs to use all the resources and the information available to carry out its functions, particularly its oversight role.

The strategic business intelligence provided by N6 will be used for many purposes, including the risk management framework, the audit input, the follow-up, and the provision of exhaustive information for senior PSC managers. Access to the resulting information will not be shared with other departments, though the information may be used by senior PSC managers in meetings with other departments.

N6 software is currently used within the Information Integration Division of the Audit Branch. This version will be replaced by a new version in the near future. Appointments Information and Analysis Directorate is not the only user of this software within the PSC.

As the volume of information is increasing and particularly when the information integration process – merging different data sources – is achieved, it will be important to assess the level of security in terms of storage, access and backup.

Based on the PPIA, a PIA including a Data Matching addendum for the Privacy Commissioner is needed for the N6 Application.

Disclosure under Section 8(2) of the Privacy Act

The PSC also released personal information under section 8(2)(b) of the PA. Such releases were authorized in the context of the old PSEA (R.S.C., 1985, c. P-33), section 21(1) pertaining to appeal matters.

Personal information was released under section 8 (2)(m)(ii) this year with regards to an investigation being conducted by an investigative body that does not fall within the definition of an investigative body under section 8(2)(e). Prior to disclosure, public interest and private interest tests were conducted and, in the end, it was determined that the investigative body's investigation outweighed the individual's right to privacy. A letter was sent to the Privacy Commissioner informing her of the PSC's intentions of disclosure, as required. The PSC also informed the investigative body that if they required further information in order to support their investigation, they should obtain a warrant or subpoena. Two Boards of Inquiry, conducted in March 2006, may fall subject to 8(5); the OPC will be informed during the 2006-2007 reporting period in the event the PSC deems it necessary to release the information.

Similarly, in the future, when investigations are conducted under the authority of the new PSEA (2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13), disclosure of personal information could occur in accordance with the provisions of section 19 of the new Public Service Employment Regulations (2005).

Appendix B: Statistics - Privacy Act

Appendix A: Statistics - Access to Information Act

Requests processed

  • Carried over from 2004-2005: 4
  • Received during 2005-2006: 98
  • Completed during 2005-2006: 94
  • Carried forward to 2006-2007: 8

Completion time

  • Under 30 days: 78
  • 31 - 60 days: 8
  • 61 - 120 days: 7
  • over 121 days: 1

Disposition of completed requests

  • All disclosed: 30
  • Disclosed in part: 41
  • Nothing disclosed (excluded): 1
  • Nothing disclosed (exempted): 0
  • Transferred: 10
  • Unable to process: 8
  • Withdrawn by applicant: 4
  • Treated informally: 0

Source of requests received

  • Media: 3
  • Academia: 0
  • Business: 13
  • Organization: 4
  • Public: 78

Extensions

  • Under 30 days: 8
  • Over 30 days: 8
  • Method of access
  • Copies given: 66
  • Examination: 1
  • Copies and Examination: 4

Complaints processed

  • Received during 2005-2006: 2
  • Completed during 2005-2006: 3
  • Carried forward to 2006-2007: 0

Disposition of complaints by category

  • Resolved
    • Delays: 0
    • Non-disclosure: 0
  • Withdrawn
    • Delays: 0
    • Non-disclosure: 0
  • Founded
    • Delays: 0
    • Non-disclosure: 2
  • Unfounded
    • Delays: 1
    • Non-disclosure: 0

Fees

  • Application: $410
  • Other processing fees: $253.40
  • Fees waived: $663.40

Costs

  • Full-time equivalent: 0.65
  • Salary: $44,500
  • Administration: $7,500
  • Total: $52,000

Historical comparisons

  • Requests received:
    • 1998-1999: 38
    • 1999-2000: 22
    • 2000-2001: 17
    • 2001-2002: 40
    • 2002-2003: 48
    • 2003-2004: 62
    • 2004-2005: 67
    • 2005-2006: 98
  • Requests completed
    • 1998-1999: 33
    • 1999-2000: 29
    • 2000-2001: 17
    • 2001-2002: 38
    • 2002-2003: 50
    • 2003-2004: 57
    • 2004-2005: 70
    • 2005-2006: 94

Exemptions invoked

  • Paragraph 18 (b)
    • 1998-1999: 0
    • 1999-2000: 0
    • 2000-2001: 0
    • 2001-2002: 0
    • 2002-2003: 0
    • 2003-2004: 1
    • 2004-2005: 0
    • 2005-2006: 1
  • Paragraph 19 (1)
    • 1998-1999: 5
    • 1999-2000 : 7
    • 2000-2001: 2
    • 2001-2002: 5
    • 2002-2003: 8
    • 2003-2004: 27
    • 2004-2005: 27
    • 2005-2006: 0
  • Paragraph 20 (1)(a)
    • 1998-1999: 1
    • 1999-2000: 0
    • 2000-2001 : 0
    • 2001-2002: 0
    • 2002-2003: 0
    • 2003-2004: 0
    • 2004-2005 : 0
    • 2005-2006: 36
  • Paragraph 20 (1)(b)
    • 1998-1999: 0
    • 1999-2000: 0
    • 2000-2001: 0
    • 2001-2002: 0
    • 2002-2003: 0
    • 2003-2004 : 2
    • 2004-2005: 3
    • 2005-2006: 3
  • Paragraph 20 (1)(c)
    • 1998-1999: 0
    • 1999-2000: 0
    • 2000-2001: 0
    • 2001-2002: 0
    • 2002-2003: 0
    • 2003-2004: 1
    • 2004-2005: 3
    • 2005-2006: 5
  • Paragraph 21 (1)(a)
    • 1998-1999: 1
    • 1999-2000: 2
    • 2000-2001: 0
    • 2001-2002: 0
    • 2002-2003: 0
    • 2003-2004: 2
    • 2004-2005: 4
    • 2005-2006: 5
  • Paragraph 21 (1)(b)
    • 1998-1999: 0
    • 1999-2000: 0
    • 2000-2001: 0
    • 2001-2002: 0
    • 2002-2003: 0
    • 2003-2004: 2
    • 2004-2005: 4
    • 2005-2006: 5
  • Paragraph 21 (1)(c)
    • 1998-1999: 1
    • 1999-2000: 0
    • 2000-2001: 0
    • 2001-2002: 0
    • 2002-2003: 0
    • 2003-2004: 0
    • 2004-2005: 2
    • 2005-2006: 2
  • Paragraph 21 (1)(d)
    • 1998-1999: 0
    • 1999-2000: 0
    • 2000-2001: 0
    • 2001-2002: 0
    • 2002-2003: 0
    • 2003-2004: 1
    • 2004-2005: 0
    • 2005-2006: 2
  • Section 22
    • 1998-1999: 1
    • 1999-2000: 1
    • 2000-2001: 1
    • 2001-2002: 0
    • 2002-2003: 0
    • 2003-2004: 2
    • 2004-2005: 1
    • 2005-2006: 1
  • Section 23
    • 1998-1999: 1
    • 1999-2000: 4
    • 2000-2001: 0
    • 2001-2002: 0
    • 2002-2003: 1
    • 2003-2004: 3
    • 2004-2005: 3
    • 2005-2006: 2

Exclusions invoked

  • Paragraph 68(b)
    • 1998-1999: 0
    • 1999-2000: 0
    • 2000-2001: 0
    • 2001-2002: 0
    • 2002-2003: 0
    • 2003-2004: 0
    • 2004-2005: 0
    • 2005-2006: 1
  • Paragraph 69(1)(a)
    • 1998-1999: 0
    • 1999-2000: 0
    • 2000-2001: 0
    • 2001-2002: 0
    • 2002-2003: 0
    • 2003-2004: 0
    • 2004-2005: 0
    • 2005-2006: 1

Appendix B: Statistics - Privacy Act

Requests processed

  • Carried over from 2004-05: 2
  • Received during 2005-06: 41
  • Completed during 2005-06: 39
  • Carried forward to 2006-07: 4

Completion time

  • Under 30 days: 30
  • 31 - 60 days: 7
  • 61 - 120 days: 2
  • Over 121 days: 0

Disposition of completed requests

  • All disclosed: 9
  • Disclosed in part: 13
  • Nothing disclosed (excluded): 0
  • Nothing disclosed (exempted): 0
  • Transferred: 3
  • Unable to process: 10
  • Withdrawn by applicant: 4

Extensions

  • Under 30 days (disruption of operations: 1
  • Under 30 days (consultations): 10
  • Translation: 0

Method of access

  • Copies given: 18
  • Examination: 0
  • Copies and examination: 4

Complaints processed

  • Received during 2005-06: 11
  • Completed during 2005-06: 6
  • Carried forward to 2006-07: 9

Disposition of complaints by category

  • Settled after investigation
    • Collection/Retention/Use/ Disposal/ disclosure: 0
    • Delays: 0
    • Non-disclosure/ exemptions: 1
  • Resolved
    • Collection/Retention/Use/ Disposal/ disclosure: 0
    • Delays: 0
    • Non-disclosure/ exemptions: 0
  • Withdrawn
    • Collection/Retention/Use/ Disposal/ disclosure: 0
    • Delays: 0
    • Non-disclosure/ exemptions: 0
  • Founded
    • Collection/Retention/Use/ Disposal/ disclosure: 3
    • Delays: 0
    • Non-disclosure/ exemptions: 0
  • Unfounded
    • Collection/Retention/Use/ Disposal/ disclosure: 0
    • Delays: 2
    • Non-disclosure/ exemptions: 0

Costs

  • Full-time equivalent: 0.65
  • Salary: $44,500
  • Administration: $7,500
  • Total: $52,000

Historical comparisons

  • Requests received
    • 1998 -1999: 38
    • 1999-2000: 44
    • 2000-2001: 37
    • 2001-2002: 39
    • 2002-2003: 41
    • 2003-2004: 27
    • 2004-2005: 43
    • 2005-2006: 41
  • Requests completed
    • 1998 -1999: 39
    • 1999-2000: 44
    • 2000-2001: 35
    • 2001-2002: 42
    • 2002-2003: 41
    • 2003-2004: 27
    • 2004-2005: 43
    • 2005-2006: 39

Exemptions invoked

  • Paragraph 22 (1)(a)
    • 1998 -1999: 0
    • 1999-2000: 0
    • 2000-2001: 0
    • 2001-2002: 0
    • 2002-2003: 0
    • 2003-2004: 0
    • 2004-2005: 0
    • 2005-2006: 1
  • Paragraph 22 (1)(b)
    • 1998 -1999: 0
    • 1999-2000: 1
    • 2000-2001: 0
    • 2001-2002: 0
    • 2002-2003: 0
    • 2003-2004: 0
    • 2004-2005: 0
    • 2005-2006: 1
  • Section 25
    • 1998 -1999: 0
    • 1999-2000: 0
    • 2000-2001: 0
    • 2001-2002: 0
    • 2002-2003: 0
    • 2003-2004: 0
    • 2004-2005: 1
    • 2005-2006: 0
  • Section 26
    • 1998 -1999: 15
    • 1999-2000: 12
    • 2000-2001: 9
    • 2001-2002: 15
    • 2002-2003: 15
    • 2003-2004: 8
    • 2004-2005: 19
    • 2005-2006: 11
  • Section 27
    • 1998 -1999: 2
    • 1999-2000: 5
    • 2000-2001: 1
    • 2001-2002: 1
    • 2002-2003: 0
    • 2003-2004: 0
    • 2004-2005: 2
    • 2005-2006: 1