|
|
Document
|
|
P-49
|
|
|
|
|
|
File #
|
|
Appeals 880017 and 880048
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
Ministry of Community and Social Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
O R D E R These appeals were received pursuant to subsection 50(1) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, 1987 (the " Act ") which gives a person who has made a request for access to a record under subsection 24(1) or a person who was given notice of a request under subsection 28(1) the right to appeal any decision of a head under the Act to the Commissioner. 1. On January 8, 1988, the requester wrote to the Ministry of Community and Social Services (the "institution") to request: (a) correspondence between the Ministry of Community and Social Services, a named construction company, and a named Home for Aged Persons (the "Home"), regarding a $10.5 million reconstruction project at the Home, and (b) a list of dangerous occurrences and any warnings that may have been issued by the province or the Home to the named construction company. On January 12, 1988, this request was defined more broadly to include as well: (c) any reports or evaluations about the construction project, (d) any status reports on the progress of the project, especially documents relating to the more than 6-month delay, (e) any documents revealing ongoing or past problems on a project. 2. On February 11, 1988, the institution wrote to the requester and advised that access to certain requested records was being granted. Other records were either severed or withheld from disclosure pursuant to sections 17 and 19 of the Act . 3. In the same February 11, 1988 letter, the head confirmed the existence of a record regarding "the list of 40 occurrences on the construction site". The requester was advised that an affected third party (the "third party") would be given the opportunity to make representations concerning disclosure of this information. 4. The requester wrote to me on February 12, 1988 appealing the decision of the institution, and I gave notice of the appeal to the institution (Appeal Number 880017). 5. On February 11, 1988, the institution wrote to the third party to advise of its intention to release the requested information subject to receiving representations from the third party pursuant to subsection 28(1) of the Act . 6. On March 4, 1988, the institution advised both the requester and the third party of its intention to release the third party information. 7. On March 10, 1988, the third party wrote to me appealing the Ministry's intention to release this information. Notices of appeal were sent to the requester and to the institution (Appeal Number 880048). 8. The records in dispute were obtained and reviewed by the Appeals Officer from my office. Attempts were made by the Appeals Officer and the parties to clarify the records in dispute and to settle the appeals. These attempts resulted in a final statement of the Ministry's position vis-a-vis the records, and this statement was provided to the parties in an Appeals Officer's Report. 9. On July 20, 1988, I sent notice to the appellant, the institution and the third party that I was conducting an inquiry to review the decisions of the head. Accompanying this notice was an Appeals Officer's Report. At the same time, three other affected persons were identified, provided with copies of the Appeals Officer's Report, and given an opportunity to make representations. 10. By letter dated August 4, 1988, I invited the parties and all affected persons to make written representations on the issues arising in the appeals. 11. Written representations were received from the appellant, the institution and the third party, and from two of the three affected persons. 12. On October 14, 1988, following a review of its representations, the institution was requested to clarify its position with respect to several of the records under appeal. Additional written representations were received from the institution on October 27, 1988. 13. So that I might better understand the nature of the relationships between the various parties and affected persons, the institution was asked to provide me with copies of public records relating to legal actions which had been commenced. These records were received on December 23, 1988 and subsequently reviewed. 14. I have considered all representations received in making my Order. The issues that arise in the context of these appeals are as follows: A. Whether the decision of the head to release Record #1 should be upheld. B. Whether any of the requested records are exempt from release pursuant to subsection 17(1)(b) of the Act . C. If the answer to Issue B is in the negative, whether any of the requested records are subject to the discretionary exemption provided by section 19 of the Act . D. If the answer to Issue B and/or Issue C is in the affirmative, whether any of the records can reasonably be severed, under subsection 10(2) of the Act , without disclosing the information that falls under an exemption. E. Whether the public interest override provided by section 23 of the Act applies to any records found eligible for exemption under the Act . At the outset, the purposes of the Act should be noted. Subsection 1(a) provides the right of access to information under the control of institutions in accordance with the principles that information should be available to the public and that necessary exemptions from the right of access should be limited and specific. Subsection 1(b) sets out the counter- balancing privacy protection purpose of the Act . The subsection provides that the Act should protect the privacy of individuals with respect to personal information about themselves held by institutions and should provide individuals with a right of access to their own personal information. For the purpose of clarity, I have identified the records at issue in these appeals individually. They are listed in the same order as outlined in the Appeals Officer's Report, and I will refer to them by number throughout my Order. #1 Inspection Tour Notes prepared by Home dated August 13, 1987 This record contains the list of alleged safety violations at the Home and represents the third party information referred to in paragraphs 3, 5, 6 and 7, above. #2 Memo to the institution's Solicitor from
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
-
FIPPA
-
10(2)
-
17(1)(a), (b) & (c)
-
Section 19
-
Section 53
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed by
|
|
Sidney Linden
|
|
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Apr 10, 1989
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order
|
|
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|