Decisions

The complainant alleged that the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC) had improperly withheld information under the following provisions of the Access to Information Act:

• subsection 13(1) (confidential information from government bodies);
• section 14 (federal-provincial affairs);
• paragraph 16(1)(c) (conduct of investigations);
• subsection 16(2) (facilitating the commission of an offence);
• subsection 19(1) (personal information);
• paragraph 20(1)(b) (confidential third-party financial, commercial, scientific or technical information);
• paragraph 20(1)(c) (financial impact on a third party);
• paragraph 21(1)(a) (advice or recommendations);
• paragraph 21(1)(b) (accounts of consultations or deliberations);
• paragraph 21(1)(c) (positions or plans developed for negotiations);
• paragraph 21(1)(d) (plans related to personnel management or administration);
• section 23 (solicitor-client and litigation privilege);
• subsection 24(1) (disclosure restricted by another law); and
• paragraph 68(a) (material published or available for purchase).

This was in response to an access request for information related to IAAC’s 2020-2021 inspection plan. The allegation falls under paragraph 30(1)(a) of the Act.

The parties did not demonstrate that the requirements of the applied exemptions were met for certain information. IAAC did not provide any information indicating that it had considered its obligation to exercise its discretion to decide whether to disclose the information.

The Information Commissioner ordered that IAAC disclose certain information where the parties had not demonstrated that the requirements of the exemptions were met. IAAC gave notice to the Commissioner that it would comply with the order. The complaint is well founded.

The complainant alleged that Health Canada did not respond to an access request within the 30 day or extended period set out in section 7 of the Access to Information Act. The request was for records from specific dates related to parliamentary proceedings in 2021 and 2022 to obtain certain documents related to the Public Health Agency of Canada and the National Microbiology Laboratory. The allegation falls under paragraph 30(1)(a) of the Act.

Health Canada is deemed to have refused access to the requested records under subsection 10(3).

The investigation revealed that, despite having completed consultations and finalized the processing, the response to the access request was then put on hold.

Health Canada advised that the request was placed on hold because, at the time of the planned response to the complainant, it was informed by one of the Offices of Primary Interest (Corporate Services Branch - Security) that multiple investigations into the incident at the National Microbiology Laboratory were still ongoing.

The Information Commissioner advised that the conduct of Health Canada in relation to the request was neither authorized nor justifiable under the Act, as the Act does not authorize an institution to “pause” the response to an access request pending the outcome of an investigation. Furthermore, the Information Commissioner stated that concerns relating to the sensitivity of the information or the impact its disclosure could have on ongoing investigations are appropriately addressed through the timely application of exemptions.

The Information Commissioner notified Health Canada of her intention to order Health Canada to provide a complete response to the access request no later than the 36^th business day following the date of the final report.

Health Canada gave notice to the Commissioner that it had already provided a response to the access request. Therefore, the Commissioner advised that it was not necessary for her to issue an order to that effect. 

The complaint is well founded.