Guide to FOIP-Chapter 4

Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to FOIP, Chapter 4, Exemptions from the Right of Access. Updated 8 April 2024. 100 Cabinet confidences are generally defined as, in the broadest sense, the political secrets of Ministers individually and collectively, the disclosure of which would make it very difficult for the government to speak in unison before Parliament and the public.356 Including means that the list of information that follows is not complete (non-exhaustive). The examples in the provision are the types of information that could be presumed to disclose a confidence of the Executive Council (Cabinet).357 The following two-part test can be applied: 1. Does the record contain advice, proposals, recommendations, analyses or policy options? Advice is guidance offered by one person to another.358 It can include the analysis of a situation or issue that may require action and the presentation of options for future action, but not the presentation of facts.359 Advice encompasses material that permits the drawing of inferences with respect to a suggested course of action, but which does not itself make a specific recommendation. It can be an implied recommendation.360 The “pros and cons” of various options also qualify as advice.361 It should not be given a restricted meaning. Rather, it should be interpreted to include an opinion that involves exercising judgement and skill in weighing the significance of fact. It includes expert opinion on matters of fact on which a public body must make a decision for future action.362 356 Federal Access to Information and Privacy Legislation Annotated 2015 (Canada: Thomson Reuters Canada Limited, 2014) at page 1-644.4. 357 British Columbia Government Services, FOIPPA Policy and Procedures Manual at Accessed June 26, 2019. 358 Garner, Bryan A., 2019. Black’s Law Dictionary, 11th Edition. St. Paul, Minn.: West Group at p. 67. 359 Service Alberta, FOIP Guidelines and Practices: 2009 Edition, Chapter 4 at pp. 166 and 179. The SK OIPC relied on this definition for the first time in Review Report LA-2010-001 at [28]. Also relied on in SK OIPC Review Report F-2014-001 at [282]. 360 John Doe v. Ontario (Finance), [2014] 2 SCR 3, 2014 SCC 36 (CanLII) at [26]. Relied on by Justice Danyliuk in Britto v University of Saskatchewan, 2018 SKQB 92 at [77]. 361 John Doe v. Ontario (Finance), [2014] 2 SCR 3, 2014 SCC 36 (CanLII) at [47]. Relied on in ON IPC Order PO-3470-R at [21]. 362 College of Physicians of B.C. v. British Columbia (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2002 BCCA 665 (CanLII) at [113] to [114].