A Parliament member’s motion to see unredacted internal Canadian Broadcasting Company files could force the broadcaster to disclose its sources, critics charged yesterday.

The bid came amid allegations that the government has been pulled into a “dirty war” between the public broadcaster and privately-owned competitor, Quebecor.

Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro made a motion seeking the documents yesterday. His access to information, privacy and ethics committee is examining changes to Canada’s Access to Information Act in the context of an ongoing legal battle over disclosure the CBC is fighting with Information Commissioner Suzanne Legault.

Quebecor – along with the Canadian Taxpayers Federation and Friends of Canadian Broadcasting, an independent watchdog group – has filed a number of requests for information on how the CBC spends taxpayer funds. CBC has provided documents in response to some requests, but declined to provide others, citing an exemption in the Act for journalistic, creative and programming activity that does not concern the corporation’s general administration.

That led to litigation with Legault over who holds authority to determine which documents are exempt. A federal judge sided with Legault, but the CBC has appealed the decision.

The broadcaster claims it has responded promptly to access requests since it came under the provisions of access rules in 2007, but Legault disputes that assertion and recently accused the CBC of arbitrarily rejecting requests. She told Del Mastro’s committee yesterday that the broadcaster should be required to show harm from the release of certain documents and that the public interest should be weighed in each decision.

Marc-Philippe Laurin, of the Canadian Media Guild, which represents the CBC, Reuters and The Canadian Press, has accused MPs of playing into Quebecor’s attacks on its competition. He accused Quebecor of using access requests to advance its own interest and to diminish those of its competitor. Del Mastro, however, charged the CBC with hypocrisy by relying on the Act to break exclusive stories while refusing requests from competitors for information on its own workings.

A vote on the motion is scheduled for Tuesday, but opposition MPs urged the committee to consider legal opinion before moving forward.

The disclosure of journalists’ sources has recently been a hot topic in North America. Prosecutors in the United States last week appealed a federal judge’s decision that New York Times reporter James Risen does not have to reveal his source of information about a Central Intelligence Agency effort to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program at the end of the Clinton administration.

Media freedom advocates have decried the Obama administration’s ongoing crackdown on officials accused of disclosing restricted information to journalists. According to The New York Times, civilian and military prosecutors have charged five people in cases involving leaking information since President Obama took office, more than all previous presidents combined.

Last month Republican Mike Pence of Indiana re-introduced a bill in the House of Representatives that would provide protections for journalists in federal courts. Pence previously introduced a similar bill in 2005, 2007 and 2009. The House has passed the bill twice, but both efforts ultimately died on the Senate floor. The currently bill is currently pending before a House subcommittee.