Privy Council Office (Re), 2025 OIC 58

Date: 2025-12-05
OIC file number: 5824-02937
Access request number: A-2024-00337

Summary

The complainant alleged that the Privy Council Office (PCO) did not conduct a reasonable search in response to an access request under the Access to Information Act for All documents, memoranda, e-mails, correspondence, briefing notes, text messages, messages on Microsoft Teams or any other messaging platform, and any other records, including drafts, from July 25, 2023, to the present.

The allegation falls within paragraph 30(1)(a) of the Act.

The investigation determined that one Office of Primary Interest did not retrieve all relevant records when it was tasked to do so. PCO was unable to show that it conducted a reasonable search for all of the records responsive to the access request. An additional search conducted during the investigation resulted in an additional 26 pages of relevant records being located and processed.

The Information Commissioner ordered that PCO provide the subsequent response to the access request no later than 36 business days after the date of the Final Report.

PCO gave notice to the Commissioner that it would be implementing the order.

The complaint is well founded.

Complaint

[1]The complainant alleged that the Privy Council Office (PCO) did not conduct a reasonable search in response to an access request under the Access to Information Act for the following:

[2]All documents, memoranda, e-mails, correspondence, briefing notes, text messages, messages on Microsoft Teams or any other messaging platform, and any other records, including drafts, from July 25, 2023, to the present, respecting the management of the government’s parliamentary agenda in the House of Commons, including (1) weekly “Parliamentary Strategy Meeting” notes, talking points for Deputy Ministers’ Weekly meetings, and similar products; (2) materials prepared for bilateral meetings between the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and the Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet (Governance); (3) Government Motion No. 30, concerning proceedings on Bill C-56, considered by the House on November 22 and 23, 2023; (4) Government Motion No. 31, concerning proceedings on Bill C-50, considered by the House on December 1 and 4, 2023; (5) Government Motion No. 34, concerning proceedings on Bill C-62, considered by the House on February 12 and 13, 2024; (6) Government Motion No. 35, concerning the extension of sitting hours and conduct of extended proceedings for the remainder of the First Session of the 44th Parliament, considered by the House on February 26 and 28, 2024; and (7) Government Motion No. 39, concerning proceedings on Bill C-64, considered by the House on May 10 and 22, 2024.

[3]The allegation falls within paragraph 30(1)(a) of the Act.

Investigation

[4]PCO was required to conduct a reasonable search for records that fall within the scope of the access request—that is, one or more experienced employees, knowledgeable in the subject matter of the request, must have made reasonable efforts to identify and locate all records reasonably related to the request. A reasonable search involves a level of effort that would be expected of any fair, sensible person tasked with searching for responsive records where they are likely to be stored. This search does not have to be perfect. An institution is therefore not required to prove with absolute certainty that further records do not exist. Institutions must however, be able to show that they took reasonable steps to identify and locate responsive records.

Did the institution conduct a reasonable search for records?

[5]At the time the request was processed, PCO Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) tasked the Machinery of Government, Democratic Institutions, Legislation and House Planning and Social Development Policy for the requested information. Each of the Offices of Primary Interest (OPIs) provided nil responses to the ATIP office.

[6]PCO responded to the access request on September 20, 2024, advising the complainant that no relevant records were found. However, in representations received by the Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC), the complainant alleged that an incomplete search was undertaken. Specifically, the complainant asserted the following:

With respect to “Parliamentary Strategy Meeting” notes, it has been the complainant’s experience that, for in excess of at least a decade, the Legislation and House Planning secretariat at the PCO has prepared briefing notes for the Government House Leader and his or her colleagues on the government’s parliamentary management team, for every week the House of Commons sits, which offer a lookahead for the business of the House, typically in support of a meeting held on Monday mornings where these issues are discussed.
With respect to the “Deputy Ministers’ Weekly” products, for many years the Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet (Governance) (or similarly titled officials) have briefed fellow deputy heads about parliamentary business at a weekly meeting (once upon a time known as “Deputy Ministers’ Breakfast), usually held on Wednesdays. The Legislation and House Planning secretariat at the PCO would typically prepare speaking notes in support of this presentation.
With respect to briefing materials for bilateral meetings, the complainant has noticed in response to other access to information requests that briefing materials would be routinely prepared by relevant PCO secretariats to support the recent Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet (Governance), Paul MacKinnon, when he met with the recent Government House Leader, Mark Holland.
With respect to the other items in the request, concerning specific items of House business, the PCO’s Legislation and House Planning secretariat typically provides ongoing updates about parliamentary developments. Whether or not specific briefing materials may have been prepared concerning these pieces of business, they would have most likely been discussed and/or referenced in these update products.

[7]I also questioned how there can be no records relating to the management of the government’s parliamentary agenda in the House of Commons, given the role and responsibilities of the Government House Leader to manage the agenda. I noted that the request identifies seven (7) issues, including five (5) Government Motions, that are to be “included” in the search for records. This signifies that the list of items is not exhaustive and other items could also be included within the parameters of the request - All documents, memoranda, e-mails, correspondence, briefing notes, text messages, messages on Microsoft Teams or any other messaging platform, and any other records, including drafts, from July 25, 2023, to the present, respecting the management of the government’s parliamentary agenda in the House of Commons….

[8]I was therefore not convinced that a reasonable search for the requested records was conducted and that all relevant records were located and processed.

[9]As a result, my office sought representations from PCO concerning its search for the requested records. In response, PCO advised that subsequent searches were conducted by each of the four OPIs listed by the OIC. Tasking was sent to Democratic Institutions, Social Development Policy, Legislation and House Planning, and Machinery of Government. PCO revealed the following results:

The DI and SDP teams reported no records found related to the request. MOG is not the appropriate secretariat involved in setting the parliamentary agenda and therefore have no records. The appropriate office of primary interest for retrieving such records is L&HP, given that they lead work on parliamentary agendas and legislative forecasts.
During the secondary search L&HP identified two briefing notes prepared for the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons concerning Bill C-64, totaling 26 pages of additional records. These records were not retrieved during the initial search because they were housed within a library of briefing notes maintained by PCO-ATIP, rather than directly by L&HP. It was only during the secondary search, when PCO-ATIP searched this library, that the records were uncovered.
Regarding the inquiry related to the scope of the initial search parameters, the DI team confirmed that their search extended beyond the seven listed items in the request text and included files related to engagement with the Government House Leader or their office, as well as records on the government's parliamentary agenda from July 25, 2023, to August 26, 2024. Conversely, the SDP team stated that their search was strictly limited to the specific items listed in the request. L&HP responded that the relevant information is no longer available, as it was previously held by senior managers who have since left PCO, and it was not in the possession of lower-level executives, managers, or staff. MOG reiterated that they are not the correct OPI for this request, as the responsibility for work related to the government's parliamentary agenda lies with L&HP, which should possess extensive records on the matter.
In response to whether records exist regarding the management of the government's parliamentary agenda in the House of Commons during the specified period, DI confirmed that it does not possess such records. This is because Di's mandate focuses on supporting the Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet (Governance) and the Minister responsible for Democratic Institutions, the Hon. Dominic LeBlanc during the relevant period. DI's responsibilities and efforts during this time did not involve managing the government's parliamentary agenda, and therefore no relevant records were produced.
Pertaining to the "Parliamentary Strategy Meeting" notes from July 25, 2023, to August 26, 2024, DI clarified that it does not have such records. While DI is part of the Governance branch of PCO alongside L&HP and MOG, its responsibilities are distinct, and it does not support L&HP, the Government House Leader, or their office on matters related to Parliamentary Strategy Meetings or the parliamentary agenda. L&HP, after conducting a thorough search within its own libraries and through PCO-ATIP 's library of L&HP-originated briefing notes, also confirmed that it does not have any records of such meeting notes. This result is despite explicitly searching for those specific records during the process. MOG reiterated its position that it is not the appropriate office for tasks relating to parliamentary agenda management, noting that such work is led exclusively by L&HP. Likewise, SDP affirmed that these records would belong to L&HP and confirmed that no such records are in its possession.
Regarding the "Deputy Ministers' Weekly" products and associated speaking notes, none of the offices reported having records of this nature for the period between July 25, 2023, and August 26, 2024. DI clarified that its support for the Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet (Governance) is restricted to issues concerning the portfolio of the Minister responsible for Democratic Institutions and does not include L&HP ' s activities related to coordinating the government's legislative agenda. L&HP indicated that it does not possess any such records despite extensive searches through its own libraries, as well as PCO-ATIP's library of L&HP originated briefing notes, neither of which yielded the sought-after records. MOG reiterated that it is not the appropriate office to be tasked with this request, emphasizing that responsibility for parliamentary agenda management and records related to it resides with L&HP. Similarly, SDP confirmed that these records would logically belong to L&HP and stated that no such documents are in its possession.
In response to the inquiry concerning briefing materials prepared for bilateral meetings between the Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet (Governance) and the Government House Leader during the period from July 25, 2023, to August 26, 2024, no relevant records were identified. DI confirmed that it was not responsible for supporting the Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet (Governance) in any such meetings during the specified period. L&HP similarly stated that it does not have any records of this nature in its possession. Despite extensive searches conducted within both L&HP's own libraries and PCO-ATIP ' s library of L&HP-originated briefing materials, no records related to these bilateral meetings were located. MOG reiterated its position that it is not the appropriate office for retrieving such records. SDP also confirmed that if such records exist, they will properly belong to L&HP and reported that they do not have any such materials within its possession.
In response to the question about materials related to specific items of House business and updates on parliamentary developments from July 25, 2023, to August 26, 2024, DI confirmed that it does not have such records. DI clarified that its responsibilities during this period did not involve contributing to matters related to the specific items of House business listed in the request, as these issues did not pertain to the portfolio of the Minister of Democratic Institutions. Furthermore, as DI operates separately from L&HP, it was not involved in or engaged with any updates or records that L&HP may have provided on these topics.

[10]Finally, PCO officials contend that PCO ATIP tasked its Information Management Operations (IM Ops) OPI with an initial search for records in order to ensure that PCO sought records from all offices that may potentially possess them. IM Ops found no records. IM Ops searched throughout both BNET GCdocs and CABNET GCdocs for documents created within the date range of July 25, 2023, to August 26, 2024, using the following search terms:

Management PROX [1OJ agenda AND house of commons
"Parliamentary strategy meeting"
Talking points PROX [10] Deputy ministers' weekly meetings
Bilateral meeting AND Leader of the government in the house of commons AND deputy secretary to the Cabinet (Governance)
"Government motion 30" OR "Government motion no. 30" OR "Government motion number 30" OR "motion 30" OR "motion no. 30" OR "motion number 30"
"Government motion 31" OR "Government motion no. 31" OR "Government motion number 31" OR "motion 31" OR "motion no. 31" OR "motion number 31"
"Government motion 34" OR "Government motion no. 34" OR "Government motion number 34" OR "motion 34" OR "motion no. 34" OR "motion number 34"
"Government motion 35" OR "Government motion no. 35" OR "Government motion number 35" OR "motion 35" OR "motion no. 35" OR "motion number 35"
"Government motion 39" OR "Government motion no. 39" OR "Government motion number 39" OR "motion 39" OR "motion no. 39" OR "motion number 39"

[11]PCO ATIP maintains that PCO's OPIs have searched thoroughly throughout all of PCO's libraries for the requested records, and the total records identified are two briefing notes collectively containing 26 pages. PCO has committed to promptly review the two records to determine the application of exemptions and exclusions under the Act, in consultation with the responsible OPIs. Once the review is complete, PCO ATIP will then provide a supplementary release of the records to the complainant.

[12]I am satisfied that PCO has now conducted a reasonable search for the requested records.

Outcome

[13]The complaint is well founded.

Order

I order the Clerk of the Privy Council to:

Complete the retrieval of all records responsive to the request.
Process all additional pages of records located as a result of the additional searches.
Provide a supplementary response to the access request no later than 36 business days after the date of the Final Report.
Give the complainant access to responsive records, unless access to them, or to part of them, may be refused under a specific provision(s) of Part 1 of the Act. When this is the case, name the provision(s).

Initial report and notice from institution

On October 29, 2025, I issued my initial report to the Clerk of the Privy Council setting out my order.

On November 28, 2025, the Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Ministerial Services and Corporate Affairs gave me notice that PCO would be implementing the order. PCO advised my office that there are 26 pages of responsive records for this request, and a consultation is required with the Department of Justice Canada. This consultation is expected to be completed by December 17, 2025. Once received, a review from PCO’s Legislation and House Planning secretariat will be required. PCO is expediting the review of records in order to provide a response as set out above.

Review by Federal Court

When an allegation in a complaint falls under paragraph 30(1)(a), (b), (c), (d), (d.1) or (e) of the Act, the complainant has the right to apply to the Federal Court for a review. When the Information Commissioner makes an order(s), the institution also has the right to apply for a review.

Whoever applies for a review must do so within 35 business days after the date of this report and serve a copy of the application for review to the relevant parties, as per section 43. If no one applies for a review by this deadline, the order(s) takes effect on the 36th business day after the date of this report.