These were two of five recommendations for updates to P.E.I.’s Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy (FOIPP) Act delivered by privacy commissioner Karen Rose following her office’s review of the current legislation.
Rose says Islanders currently do not have a legislated right to access information in the custody of towns and cities across P.E.I. and there are no obligations to protect the privacy and personal information in municipal care.
That’s something that should be changed, she says.
Last year, a new Municipal Government Act (MGA) was passed in the legislature, which will create a host of new rules and regulations for cities and towns to follow, including access to information and disclosure bylaws. This act has not yet come into force.
But Rose raised several concerns over this approach. No independent oversight over what information municipalities release or choose to withhold is a “significant concern,” she told a legislative standing committee Thursday.
Rose also noted disclosure provisions in the MGA will not apply retroactively, while the province’s FOIPP law applies to any and all records generated before it was enacted in 2002.
---
- P.E.I.’s FOIPP Act was proclaimed in November 2002
- The last time P.E.I.’s FOIPP act was reviewed was in 2008-09. Recommended amendments by the privacy commissioner were not enacted
- Last year P.E.I.’s Access and Privacy Services Office processed almost 200 FOIPP requests and could exceed this number in 2017.
---
The Federation of P.E.I. Municipalities has argued that bringing towns and cities under freedom of information law would be too costly for municipalities already struggling to deliver effective public services.
Rose disagrees.
“I think the Municipal Government Act could be a burden,” she said.
“Adding municipalities under the FOIPP Act would be less of a burden and that’s because we have 15 years of experience under the FOIPP Act, we have resources.”
Rose further noted particular concerns over local police forces not currently being subject to FOIPP, unlike the RCMP, which falls under federal access to information law.
Police often work with other bodies to share information, such as the P.E.I. Bridge program, which could result in privacy breeches.
“Islanders need to know that their personal information is being protected. Local police services have no legislative requirement at all to protect the personal information of the people whose information they are discussing,” Rose said.
“And that is because there is a gap in the legislation.”
As for post-secondary institutions, Rose says their current self-generated privacy and access policies simply do not go far enough.
“There’s no independent oversight, and at both UPEI and Holland College you can ask for reconsideration from a vice president in both cases, but I don’t consider that independent oversight,” Rose said, adding that both institutions already have staff in place to handle freedom of information requests.
“I think they’re ready.”
These recommendations were delivered to the legislature as part of a review of the province’s FOIPP act, triggered by Premier Wade MacLauchlan in his 2015 throne speech.
The recommendations are not binding, but in an opinion letter to The Guardian published in March, Workforce and Advanced Learning Minister Sonny Gallant said he “expect(s) government will fully support recommendations on FOIPP for municipalities and post-secondary institutions.”
Prince Edward Island remains the only province in Canada that does not include municipalities and post-secondary institutions under access to information law.
Rose made three other recommendations, including: requiring information subject to solicitor-client be released to the privacy commissioner for review; to reduce the amount of time records are exempted from disclosure because of “cabinet confidences” or “advice to officials” from 20 years to 15; create a requirement for the FOIPP act to be reviewed every six years.