|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Document
|
|
P-1205
|
|
|
|
|
|
File #
|
|
P-9500611
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
Ministry of the Attorney General
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
NATURE OF THE APPEAL: The Ministry of the Attorney General (the Ministry) received a request under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act ) for copies of the following records: 1. any memoranda from persons who prepared Ontario Regulation 293/92 which accompanied the regulation as it was sent to the Minister or to Cabinet for approval; 2. any memoranda or other documents accompanying Regulation 293/92 or "associated with it after its preparation, referring to any association between any fees in the regulation and the "NON-TAX REVENUE STRATEGY"; 3. the contract between the Ministry and Treasury Board dealing with the court fees and probate fees covered by Regulation 293/92. Ontario Regulation 293/92 deals with an increase in the Court Tariff of Fees under the Administration of Justice Act . After some correspondence between the Ministry and the requester, the Ministry identified 313 pages comprising 46 responsive records, which it described in an index sent to the requester with the decision letter. The Ministry granted access to one record (Record 43), a three-page excerpt from the Ontario Gazette. The Ministry claimed the following sections of the Act to deny access to the remaining 45 records: cabinet records - section 12(1) advice and recommendations - section 13(1) solicitor-client privilege - section 19 The requester (now the appellant) appealed the Ministry's decision to deny access, and also identified eight additional records which he believed were in the custody or control of the Ministry but had not been identified in the decision letter. Five of these records were subsequently located by the Ministry and disclosed to the appellant. The remaining three records could not be located, and the adequacy of the Ministry's search for these records will be addressed in my order. A Notice of Inquiry was sent to the Ministry and the appellant. Representations were received from both parties. After receiving the Notice of Inquiry, the Ministry changed its decision regarding Records 31, 32 and 33, and disclosed these records to the appellant. RECORDS In its representations, the Ministry states that Record 42 is not responsive to the appellant's request because it is a draft of what became Regulation 29 5 /92, not 29 3 /92. According to the Ministry, this record was placed in the file in error. Because of the clarity of the appellant's request, I am prepared to accept the Ministry's position, and I find that Record 42 falls outside the scope of the appellant's request and I will not consider it further in this order. Three of the records at issue in this appeal (Records 44, 45 and 46) are currently the subject of a judicial review application in the context of another order of this office (Order P-920). Consequently, I have decided to deal with all other records in this interim order. As soon as the judicial review in Order P-920 has been completed, I will issue a final order relating to Records 44-46. The index created by the Ministry and sent to the appellant with the original decision letter omitted reference to Records 16, 17 and 18. This omission was drawn to the Ministry's attention by the appellant. These three records are all memoranda from legal counsel to staff of the Ministry's Program Development Branch, dated March 8, 10 and 13, 1992. The Ministry claims section 19 of the Act as the basis for denying access to all three records, and I find that these records fall within the scope of this appeal. In summary, the records which are at issue for the purposes of this inquiry are Records 1-30 and 34-41. DISCUSSION: CABINET RECORDS Section 12 of the Act provides, in part, as follows: A head shall refuse to disclose a record where the disclosure would reveal the substance of deliberations of an Executive Council or its committees, including, (a) an agenda, minute or other record of the deliberations or decisions of the Executive Council or its committees, (b) a record containing policy options or recommendations submitted, or prepared for submission, to the Executive Council or its committees; ... (e) a record prepared to brief a minister of the Crown in relation to matters that are before or are proposed to be brought before the Executive Council or its committees, or are the subject of consultations among ministers relating to government decisions or the formulation of government policy; and (f) draft legislation or regulations. It has been determined in a number of previous orders that the use of the term "including" in the introductory wording of section 12(1) means that the disclosure of any record which would reveal the substance of deliberations of the Executive Council or its committees (not just the types of records listed under the various parts of section 12(1)), qualifies for exemption under section 12(1). The appellant did not address section 12 in his representations. Section 12(1)(f) The Ministry claims section 12(1)(f) as the basis for exempting Records 20, 27, 28 and 35-41. I have examined all of these records, and I find that, with the exception of a two-page attachment to Record 35, they are draft regulations, and are properly exempt under section 12(1)(f) of the Act . The attachment to Record 35 appears to be a draft and final version of an "Information Sheet for Regulations", which provides certain explanatory details about the regulation to which it refers. I find that these two pages are not part of the actual regulation, and therefore do not qualify for exemption under section 12(1)(f). Section 12(1)(e) The Ministry claims that Records 11, 25 and 26 qualify for exemption under section 12(1)(e). Records 11 and 25/26 (which are duplicates), are draft and final versions of an "Information Sheet for Regulations" which the Ministry states must accompany all draft regulations being considered by the Legislation Committee of Cabinet. (The attachments to Record 35 are the same type of records, although the Ministry has not claimed section 12(1)(e) as a basis for exempting Record 35.) To satisfy the requirements of this exemption claim, the Ministry must establish that the reco
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
-
FIPPA
-
12(1)(a)
-
12(1)(b)
-
12(1)(e)
-
12(1)(f)
-
Section 19
-
13(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed by
|
|
Tom Mitchinson
|
|
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Jun 14, 1996
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order – Final
|
|
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|
|
Back to Top
|
 |
|
|
|
© Copyright
2013
Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. All Rights Reserved.
|