Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to FOIP, Chapter 4, Exemptions from the Right of Access. Updated 24 July 2025. 122 In order for this provision to apply, the records must contain briefings and be intended for Executive Council. In addition, subsections 16(1)(d)(i) or (ii) must apply. The purpose for which the record was prepared is key. Subsection 16(2) of FOIP requires disclosure of cabinet documents where: • the record has been in existence for more than 25 years; or • consent to release is given by the President of the Executive Council or in absence of the President, the next senior member of Executive Council. However, if the record contains personal information, the rules around disclosure under section 30 of FOIP still apply. IPC Findings In Review Report 016-2015, the Commissioner found that information in Transition Briefing Binders that was already publicly available did not qualify for the exemption. In Review Report 159-2016, the Commissioner considered subsection 16(1)(d) of FOIP. An applicant had made an access to information request to the Global Transportation Hub Authority (GTH) for all internal documentation/records related to Brightenview Internal Developments Inc. between January 1, 2013 and April 5, 2016. The GTH responded to the applicant withholding the records in full citing several provisions including subsection 16(1)(d) of FOIP. Upon review, the Commissioner found that nine of the records could be described as briefing notes. As GTH did not provide anything to demonstrate that the briefing notes were prepared for or intended for members of the Executive Council, the Commissioner was not persuaded that subsection 16(1)(d) of FOIP applied to the briefing notes. In Review Report 157-2016, the Commissioner considered subsection 16(1)(d) of FOIP. An applicant had made an access to information request to the GTH for all correspondence between the GTH and any other ministry related to Brightenview International Development Inc. from December 1, 2015 to April 5, 2016. The GTH responded to the applicant withholding the records in full citing several provisions including subsection 16(1)(d) of FOIP. The GTH applied subsection 16(1)(d) to 12 emails. Upon review, one group of the emails dealt with the timing of an announcement of a decision already approved by Cabinet. None of the emails included a member of the Executive Council. The second group of emails dealt with a news release regarding a decision approved by Cabinet. Again, no members of the Executive Council were included in the emails. The Commissioner was not persuaded that subsection 16(1)(d) of FOIP applied to the emails.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==