Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to FOIP, Chapter 4, Exemptions from the Right of Access. Updated 8 April 2024. 127 between the goals of preserving an effective public service capable of producing full, free and frank advice and the goal of providing a meaningful right of access.466 The British Columbia Court of Appeal similarly stated in College of Physicians of British Columbia v. British Columbia (Information and Privacy Commissioner), (2002), that the equivalent provision in British Columbia’s Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, RSBC 1996, c 165, “recognizes that some degree of deliberative secrecy fosters the decision-making process.”467 However, protecting information is balanced against the need for effective public participation in a democracy. In Canada Council of Christian Charities v. Canada (Minister of Finance), (1999), Justice Evans stated: [32] On the other hand, of course, democratic principles require that the public, and this often means the representatives of sectional interests, are enabled to participate as widely as possible in influencing policy development. Without a degree of openness on the part of government about its thinking on public policy issues, and without access to relevant information in the possession of government, the effectiveness of public participation will inevitably be curbed.468 When determining the application of section 17 of FOIP, government institutions should keep the intention of the Legislature for provisions like section 17 of FOIP in mind along with the purposes of FOIP. For more on this, go to Balancing Interests under the heading titled, Interpreting Exemptions earlier in this Chapter. In addition, see the Guide to FOIP, Chapter 1, “Purposes and Scope of FOIP,” under the heading, The Purposes of FOIP. 466 John Doe v. Ontario (Finance), [2014] 2 SCR 3, 2014 SCC 36 (CanLII) at [43] to [46]. Also relied on by Justice Kalmakoff in Leo v Global Transportation Hub Authority, 2019 SKQB 150 at [31]. 467 College of Physicians of B.C. v. British Columbia (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2002 BCCA 665 (CanLII) at [105]. Also noted in BC IPC Order F14-57 at [10]. 468 Canada Council of Christian Charities v. Canada (Minister of Finance), 1999 CanLII 8293 (FC), [1999] 4 F.C. 245 at [32].
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==