|
|
Document
|
|
P-726
|
|
|
|
|
|
File #
|
|
P_9300638
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
Ministry of Natural Resources
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
NATURE OF THE APPEAL: This is an appeal under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act ). The appellant sought access to two reports from the Ministry of Natural Resources (the Ministry) relating to the operation of the Ontario Provincial Parks system. The appellant is a non-profit organization with an interest in the preservation of provincial parks. The Ministry decided to deny access to both documents based on the following exemptions contained in the Act : Cabinet records - sections 12(1)(b) and (c) advice or recommendations - section 13(1) proposed plans of an institution - section 18(1)(g) A Notice of Inquiry was sent to the appellant and the Ministry. Representations were received from both parties. The records at issue in this appeal consist of two reports which together constitute a business review of the provincial parks system. The first record (which is referred to as "Study A") is an internal Ministry report referred to as the Park System Rationalization Study. This report, which is made up of two volumes, identifies those provincial parks which are contributing to the overall objectives of the system and then presents options to rationalize the delivery of parks services. Volume 1 consists of the report, itself, whereas Volume 2 contains a series of supporting documents. The second record (described as "Study B") was prepared by a consulting firm and considers alternative models for the organization of the provincial parks system. DISCUSSION: CABINET RECORDS In its representations, the Ministry submits that the policy options and recommendations contained in the reports will eventually lead to a Cabinet Submission, in which some or all of the options and recommendations found in the documents will be discussed. On this basis, the Ministry submits that the studies fall within the Cabinet records exemptions found in sections 12(1)(b) and (c) of the Act . These provisions prescribe that: A head shall refuse to disclose a record where the disclosure would reveal the substance of deliberations of the Executive Council or its committees, including, (b) a record containing policy options or recommendations submitted, or prepared for submission, to the Executive Council or its committees; (c) a record that does not contain policy options or recommendations referred to in clause (b) and that does contain background explanations or analyses of problems submitted, or prepared for submission, to the Executive Council or its committees for their consideration in making decisions, before those decisions are made and implemented. In order for sections 12(1)(b) and (c) to apply to a record, the Ministry must establish that the document was submitted, or prepared for submission, to an Executive Council or one of its committees. In the present case, there is no specific evidence before me to indicate that the reports were prepared with this objective in mind. In particular, the Ministry has not established that either the present Cabinet or its committees has any plans to consider reforms to the provincial parks system. For these reasons, I find that neither section 12(1)(b) nor (c) applies to the two reports at issue. I further conclude that none of the remaining parts of section 12(1), including the introductory wording of the section, apply to the records. ADVICE OR RECOMMENDATIONS The Ministry also submits that the two reports fall within the advice and recommendations exemption found in section 13(1) of the Act . This provision states that: A head may refuse to disclose a record where the disclosure would reveal advice or recommendations of a public servant, any other person employed in the service of an institution or a consultant retained by an institution. It has been established in many previous orders that advice and recommendations for the purpose of section 13(1) must contain more than just information. To qualify as "advice" or "recommendations", the information contained in the records must relate to a suggested course of action which will ultimately be accepted or rejected by its recipient during the deliberative process. I will initially consider the application of this exemption to the internal Ministry report (Study A). Following a careful review of this record, I find that the following parts of Volume 1 contain information which qualifies as advice or recommendations under section 13(1): (1) The parts of pages iv, v, 12, 13, 31 and 32 which I have highlighted in yellow. (2) The list of recommendations found on pages 35 and 36 which are also highlighted in yellow. I further find that the remaining parts of this volume, which consist of factual materials, discussions of methodology, analyses and preliminary findings, do not constitute advice or recommendations for the purpose of the Act . The same is true for Volume two of Study A which consists solely of charts and statistics. I will now consider the report of the consulting firm (Study B). The objective of this document is to explore and select an organizational design which will best reflect the mandate of the provincial parks system. This report sets out the methodology to be used in the study, summarizes the results of interviews that were conducted, considers alternative organizational models, explores the economics of each model and provides recommendations and an implementation plan. Following a careful review of this record, I find that all or parts of pages 8, 10, 11, 43, 44, 67, 69 70, 72, 78, 80, 82, 84, 85 and 87-96, which I have highlighted in yellow, qualify for exemption under the advice or recommendations exemption. EXCEPTIONS TO THE ADVICE OR RECOMMENDATIONS EXEMPTION I must now consider whether any of the mandatory exceptions contained in section 13(2) of the Act apply to the parts of the records which I have previously characterized as advice or recommendations. In its representations, the appellant submits that the exceptions found in sections 13(2)(f) and (g) of the Act apply to any advice or recommendations in the reports which the Ministry has chosen not to disclose under section 13(1) of the Act . The Ministry, on the other hand, submits that these provisions are not applicable since only parts of the reports deal with the efficiency of the parks system.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
-
FIPPA
-
12(1)(b)
-
12(1)(c)
-
13(2)
-
13(2)(f)
-
13(2)(g)
-
18(1)(g)
-
13(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed by
|
|
Irwin Glasberg
|
|
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Jul 15, 1994
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order
|
|
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|