Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner
June 4, 2008Office of the
Information and Privacy Commissioner � Report A-2008-009 Released
The Information and Privacy Commissioner, Ed Ring, has
released his Report A-2008-009 under authority of the Access to
Information and Protection of Privacy Act. A summary of the report
is included below.
To view the report in its entirety, please go to
//www.oipc.gov.nl.ca/reports.htm
Report: A-2008-009
Report Date: May 27, 2008
Public Body: Town of Steady Brook
Summary: The Applicant requested a copy of a tape recording of a public
meeting of the Town Council, including a conversation between himself
and the Mayor that occurred immediately after the adjournment of the
meeting. This conversation had been recorded when the tape was left
running by the Town�s Administrative Assistant. Immediately after the
public meeting, a privileged meeting of Council was held. The Town
argued that the conversation took place during the privileged meeting
and was exempt from disclosure in accordance with section 19 of the
ATIPPA. The Commissioner held that the conversation to which the
Applicant sought access did not occur during a privileged meeting,
either because the public meeting of Council had not been properly
adjourned or the privileged meeting had not started. Even if the
conversation had occurred during a privileged meeting, the Town would
still not be entitled to rely on section 19, as they had provided no
evidence with respect to the substance of deliberations of the
privileged meeting, and therefore had not met the burden of proof
imposed by section 64 of the ATIPPA. The Commissioner noted that
section 19 did not prevent the disclosure of all information presented
or discussed at a privileged meeting, just that which would reveal the
substance of deliberations of a privileged meeting. There was some
evidence before the Commissioner as to the subject of the privileged
meeting (put forward by the Applicant), and given the subject of the
privileged meeting, the conversation at issue could not reveal the
substance of deliberations of the privileged meeting, as the two were
not related. The Applicant also alleged that the Town had failed in its
duty to assist, pursuant to section 9 of the ATIPPA. The
Commissioner found that the Town had not failed in its duty to assist.
- 30 -
