|
This is an appeal under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act). The Ministry of the Attorney General (the Ministry) received a request from a newspaper reporter. The request was for all documents, to and from the Assistant Deputy Attorney General or any other senior ministry official, relating to an anti-racism training course for provincial prosecutors. The requester also asked for documents relating to the expenditure of public funds for this project.
The Ministry located 19 records which were responsive to the request. Under section 28 of the Act, the Ministry gave notice of the request to the two firms who submitted proposals for the project, indicating that it was considering disclosure of the records pertaining to them, and inviting comments on the possible application of the exemptions in sections 17(1) (third party information) and 21 (invasion of privacy). In response to the notice, a representative of one firm (the unsuccessful bidder) consented to disclosure of records relating to its firm's proposal. The Co-ordinating Associate (the associate) of the second firm (the successful bidder) objected to disclosure of the majority of the records. He consented to the disclosure of a number of handouts used in the training course.
The Ministry advised the affected parties that only the information to which consent to disclose was given would be released to the requester, subject to severances which it intended to make to the portions of the records which contained personal information.
The Ministry then granted the requester full access to two of the records (Records 6 and 7). The Ministry denied access to the remaining records, in whole or in part, on the basis of the following exemptions in the Act:
advice or recommendations - section 13(1)
third party information - section 17(1)
solicitor-client privilege - section 19
invasion of privacy - section 21(1)
information published or available - section 22(a).
...
|