Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to FOIP, Chapter 4, Exemptions from the Right of Access. Updated 24 July 2025. 109 • The consideration and discussions of the reasons for and against a measure by a number of councillors.399 A deliberation can occur when there is a discussion or consideration of the reasons for or against an action.400 It can refer to discussions conducted with a view towards making a decision.401 Deliberations can include outcomes or decisions of Cabinet’s deliberative process, topics of deliberation, and priorities identified by the Premier, even if they do not ultimately result in government action.402 There is a distinction between information that is provided to Cabinet and information that would disclose the deliberations of Cabinet. In cases where the information and the deliberations are inseparable are at the core of this exemption. In cases where it is argued that the topics of discussion reveal the deliberation of Cabinet, the matters must be considered contextually and based on the evidence. Cabinet confidence is essential to ensure that the government can deliberate freely and unimpeded, but it does not exist to allow governing in secrecy.403 A decision is a determination after consideration of the facts.404 In Supreme Court of Canada decision, Ontario (Attorney Genera) v. Ontario (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2024 SCC 4, the court explained the deliberative process and that it isn’t always conducted at a boardroom table behind closed doors and this must be taken into consideration: 399 Canada (Information Commissioner) v. Toronto Port Authority, 2016 FC 683 (CanLII) at [85]. The Federal Court of Canada relied on the definitions found in the Treasury Board Secretariat’s Access to Information Manual which were based on the ordinary meaning of these words. The manual can be found at https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/access-informationprivacy/access-information/access-information-manual.html#cha11. Definition consistent with The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles, Oxford University Press 1973, Volume 1 at p. 409. Similar definition used in R. v. McDonald, 2003 NSPC 34 (CanLII) at p. 3 and Canada (Information Commissioner) v. Canada (Minister of the Environment), [2007] 3 FCR 125, 2006 FC 1235 (CanLII) at [65] and [66]. 400 AB IPC Order 96-006 at p. 10. Service Alberta, FOIP Guidelines and Practices: 2009 Edition, Chapter 4 at p. 180. Adopted in SK OIPC Review Report F-2004-001 at [12]. 401 Originated from ON IPC Order M-184 at p. 3. Adopted in SK OIPC Review Report 187-2015 at [19]. 402 Ontario (Attorney Genera) v. Ontario (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2024 SCC 4 at [62]. 403 Alberta Energy v Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2024 ABKB 198, varied by 2025 ABCA 163 but on an unrelated issue. 404 Garner, Bryan A., 2019. Black’s Law Dictionary, 11th Edition. St. Paul, Minn.: West Group at p. 511.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==