Privacy commissioner hopes ‘things will improve’
Saskatchewan’s information and privacy commissioner says he is “fine” with a possible legislative change letting local governments request a 30-day extension to reply to information requests.
Privacy commissioner Ron Kruzeniski recommended the province launch an inquiry into the Northern Village of Pinehouse in 2018, after he penned a 13th report on the village government’s failures to respond to information requests from the public. He found some requests weren’t responded to at all, while others were answered outside the 30day window currently mandated by the Local Authority Freedom of Information and Privacy (LAFOIP) Act.
The inquiry report written for the Ministry of Government Relations by retired judge William Vancise was released Wednesday. Vancise found Pinehouse officials violated LAFOIP, but attributed this to their workloads coupled with an incomplete understanding of their responsibilities under the law.
Vancise’s report also recommended the province amend LAFOIP to give the privacy commissioner discretion to grant extensions to local authorities beyond the current 30-day deadline.
“I am fine with the recommendation that Justice Vancise proposed in his report. I can see situations where an extension can be justified,” Kruzeniski said.
He said his office would take a “serious look” at requests made by local governments if they have a reasonable explanation for their difficulties. This could include turnover of administrators or a change of mayor.
Government Relations Minister Lori Carr told the Starphoenix on Wednesday that the province is considering Vancise’s recommendation.
Kruzeniski’s office currently has three open files relating to Pinehouse.
“The saying (is) the proof is in the pudding. I do have the expectation that things will improve in these three files that we now have,” he said.
D’arcy Hande, a member of the working group behind many of the information requests that led to the Pinehouse inquiry, said he was disappointed in Vancise’s findings.
In the report, Vancise wrote the working group’s actions amounted to a “concerted effort to ‘blitz’ ” Pinehouse with information requests and “overwhelm a small northern community’s administration.”
Hande said he takes exception to the report’s conclusions about the group’s motivations.
He said he felt Vancise was insinuating people from outside the Pinehouse community were being meddlesome. He explained the group didn’t engage in years of “relentless pursuit” as described by Vancise. Rather, he said 2016 was the only year they submitted multiple information requests. He stressed it all started because the group had concerns about Pinehouse’s governance.
He said he wishes the province offered more supports to help communities comply with legislation and more effective monitoring for municipal governments.
“The provincial government really does need to beef up its capacity to provide these supports and intervene when administrative abuses happen at the local level. How often does an independent inspection happen at a local municipal office with followup to ensure compliance?” he asked.
David Forbes, the Saskatchewan NDP critic for ethics and democracy, said the onus should be on the province to create processes that allow local governments to have better answers to information requests right away, and on having transparent governance from the “get-go” rather than delays.
Forbes said the Opposition will be watching closely to see what follows from Vancise’s report. “We’re really going to be ensuring that this is not a backwards step for freedom of information in Saskatchewan,” Forbes said.