|
|
Document
|
|
P-86
|
|
|
|
|
|
File #
|
|
890027
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
Ministry of Health
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
Order 86 Ministry of Health Appeal No. 890027 This letter constitutes my Interim Order in the appeal by Appellant (the "appellant") from a decision of the Ministry of Health (the "institution") to charge a fee in the amount of $9,503.80 in response to his request for information under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, 1987 . On December 6, 1988, the appellant wrote to the institution requesting access to the following records: Copies of forms, documents, Terms and Conditions, Tenders, Waivers of Tender, Prospectuses of Tender, Requests for Tenders and/or Quotations, letterhead quotes, telephone quotes, and correspondence, pertaining to 'fee for service' contracts not performed by Ministry of Health - Finance and Administration Division & Health Insurance Division staff, whether let by Sealed Tender, Request for Project Proposal, Letterhead Quote or by Telephone Quote, for all services purchased from January 1, 1983 to the present, by all offices of the Health Insurance and Finance and Administration Divisions of the Ministry of Health, with no exclusions to all the above. On January 11, 1989, the then Freedom of Information and Privacy Co-ordinator for the institution (the "Co-ordinator") responded by providing the appellant with a fee estimate for the requested records in the amount of $9,503.80. The estimate was broken down as follows: photocopies $1,727.80 manual search 3,990.00 preparation including severances 3,396.00 programming 140.00 other costs 220.00 shipping costs 30.00 $9,503.80 On February 9, 1989, the appellant wrote to my office appealing the amount of the fee, and I gave notice of the appeal to both parties on February 20, 1989. Upon receipt of the appeal, the Appeals Officer assigned to the case asked the institution to provide him with a copy of the records at issue in the appeal. He also requested an explanation of the factors considered by the head when deciding to charge a fee. In response, a representative of the institution advised the Appeals Officer that the requested records had not been retrieved and reviewed prior to the issuance of the fee estimate; rather, the Co-ordinator had contacted the various branches and departments of the institution having custody or control of these records, and asked them to provide him with an estimate of the costs involved in preparing the records for possible disclosure. The Co-ordinator simply consolidated these estimates and relayed the total estimated fee to the appellant in the January 11, 1989 letter. Although the fee estimate included charges for severing the records, this estimate was made without having reviewed the contents of the records. Consequently, the institution was unable to advise the appellant regarding the possible application of any of the exemptions contained in the Act , or whether any confidentiality provisions contained in other statutes would bar the institution from disclosing any of these records. The institution's position, as communicated to the Appeals Officer, was that the institution did not have to address the issue of the appellant's right of access to the records until the appellant paid a deposit equal to 50% of the estimated fee ($4,251.90). During the mediation process, it became clear that the appellant had a different impression. He advised the Appeals Officer that he thought all of the requested records would be released to him, unsevered, upon payment of the estimated fee. However, after he was informed that severances might in fact be made, the appellant indicated that he was not prepared to pay the fee unless and until he received an indication as to the nature and extent of exemptions which the institution might later apply. As a result, a mediated settlement was not effected. At this point, the Appeals Officer prepared a report which was sent to the parties with a letter dated April 28, 1989. This letter advised the parties that the appeal had reached the inquiry stage and invited each of them to make representations in response to issues raised in the Appeals Officer's Report. The Appeals Officer's Report asked the institution to respond to specific questions regarding the time and costs involved in locating and retrieving the requested records, and preparing them for disclosure. The institution responded to my request for representations, and I have considered this response in making this Interim Order. The appellant did not submit representations. The institution's representations included the following comments: It is submitted that the majority of the information requested is not held on a computer data bank nor on microrecords, thereby requiring manual search to identify those personnel files which meet the requirements of the request. It is submitted that the majority of the information requested is maintained in paper files which are located in a variety of offices throughout the province: - Toronto - Don Mills - Kingston - District Offices - Regional Personnel Offices - Cooksville It is submitted that two years after an unclassified employee terminates employment all personnel files are transferred to the Inactive Records Centre managed by the Ministry of Government Services. Therefore, all files dated 1983 to 1987 must be retrieved from the Centre in Mississauga. It is submitted that while some employees are clearly identified as non classified staff, in many instances this is not the case. Summer student files reside with the nonclassified staff files, as well as, some current and terminated employees who initially began their public service career following an unclassified contract position. Therefore, in order to meet the requirements of the request, in the majority of offices, all personnel files must be reviewed. It is submitted that the files which need to be examined would take 3 to 4 weeks to retrieve and another 5 to 6 weeks would be needed to review the files and pro
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed by
|
|
Sidney Linden
|
|
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Aug 21, 1989
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order – Interim
|
|
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|