ORDER P-1127

 

Appeal P-9500445

 

Ministry of Natural Resources

NATURE OF THE APPEAL:

 

The Ministry of Natural Resources (the Ministry) received a request under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act) for access to copies of the Project Whitewater Templates.  These contain information pertaining to the loss of Conservation Officer positions in the Ministry’s Southern Region, particularly the Kemptville, Tweed and Cambridge districts.  The requester represents the Ontario Conservation Officers’ Association.

 

The Ministry denied access to the fourteen records responsive to the request.  The requester appealed the Ministry’s decision to deny access.

 

The Ministry relies on the following exemptions under the Act to deny access to the records:

 

•           advice or recommendations - section 13

•           economic and other interests - section 18(1)(f)

•           proposed plans of an institution - section 18(1)(g)

 

The records that remain at issue consist of organizational/design submissions and organizational plans, with e-mail and memoranda attachments.  These are more particularly described in the Notice of Inquiry sent by the Commissioner’s office to the appellant and the Ministry.

 

The appellant raised the possible application of section 13(2)(k) of the Act.  The Notice of Inquiry invited the parties to address the possible application of this exception to the exemption in section 13(1) of the Act.  Representations were received from both parties.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The Ministry has claimed that sections 13(1), 18(1)(f) and 18(1)(g) apply to exempt the records from disclosure.  I will first examine the application of section 18(1)(f) to the records.

 

PLANS RELATING TO THE MANAGEMENT OF PERSONNEL OR THE ADMINISTRATION OF AN INSTITUTION

 

Section 18(1)(f) of the Act states as follows:

 

A head may refuse to disclose a record that contains,

 

Plans relating to the management of personnel or the administration of an institution that have not yet been put into operation or made public;

 

In order for this provision to apply to a record, the Ministry must establish that:

 

1.         the record contains a plan or plans,  and

 

2.         the plan or plans relate to:

 

(i)         the management of personnel or

 

(ii)        the administration of an institution,  and

 

3.         the plan or plans have not yet been put into operation or made public.

 

The first part of this test requires that the records contain a plan or plans.  Previous orders of the Commissioner’s office have defined the term “plan” as “a formulated and especially detailed method by which a thing is to be done; a design or scheme” (Orders P-348, P-784 and P-1094).  I agree with this interpretation and adopt it for the purposes of this appeal.

 

The Ministry states that in anticipation of provincial budget cuts, a plan was developed to address staffing cuts and a more equitable adjustment of staffing.  The records at issue relate to this specific plan and include detailed and specific proposed plans with specific templates and charts relating to personnel and administration for the Southern Region and other areas within the planning area.

 

I have carefully reviewed the information in the records and I am satisfied that it contains “a formulated and especially detailed method by which a thing is to be done” and therefore qualifies as plans for the purposes of section 18(1)(f).  I find that the first part of the test has been met.

 

The second part of the test requires that the plans relate to the management of personnel or the administration of an institution.  I find that the plans contain detailed information on the management of personnel and the administration of an institution, including charts which identify the number of related staff positions in each area.  On this basis, I find that the second part of the test has been satisfied.

 

The third part of the test requires the Ministry to establish that the plans have not yet been put into operation or made public.

 

The appellant submits that generic templates had been put together by the managers in each area or district for the purposes of a training exercise.  The appellant states that the information in the generic templates had been discussed with all staff in the Southern Region offices.

 

The Ministry’s representations confirm the position of the appellant in that the generic templates were prepared by management in the various areas and discussed with staff.  The Ministry explains that Project Whitewater was a strategic planning exercise undertaken by the Operations Division of the Ministry to address the issue of organizational restructuring and increase efficiency in anticipation of reduced resources, among other things.  The Southern Region went through a similar strategic exercise.  The intention was to enable the region to come up with its own strategic direction in order to achieve the goals established by Project Whitewater.  Generic district templates were developed for discussion within the regional offices and as a means to share principles and direction with staff.

 

The Ministry submits, however, that the information in the records is different from that in the generic templates.  The Ministry states that the records contain detailed and specific plans that have been put forth to the Minister and have not yet been implemented nor have they been made public.

 

In my view, the third part of the test has been met and I find that the records qualify for exemption under section 18(1)(f) of the Act.  I therefore need not consider the application of sections 13(1) or 18(1)(g) to the records nor do I need to consider the possible application of section 13(2)(k) to the exemption in section 13(1).

 

ORDER:

 

I uphold the decision of the Ministry.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Original signed by:                                                                           February 15, 1996                    

Mumtaz Jiwan

Inquiry Officer