Access to Information Orders

Decision Information

PO-2457-I

Collection Access to Information Orders
Date 2006-03-06
File Numbers PA-050216-1
Adjudicators John Higgins
Type Order - Interim
Subjects Head's Decision - Deemed Refusal
Applicable Legislation FIPPA; FIPPA - 29(4)
Summary:


This is an appeal under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act). On June 6, 2005 the requester submitted a request to the Ministry of Children and Youth Services (the Ministry) under the Act for access to the following information:



1. The licensing Module database for all licensed childcare programs, part of the Ministry’s System Management Information System.


2. The Special Occurrence Reporting System database.


3. Copies of all complaints against Ontario daycare facilities between January, 2000 and present.





In its decision letter dated July 18, 2005, the Ministry responded to the third part of the request with an interim access decision and fee estimate. The Ministry also requested a deposit. The Ministry did not respond to parts 1 and 2 of the request.

Decision Content

INTERIM ORDER PO-2457-I

 

Appeal PA-050216-1

 

Ministry of Children and Youth Services

NATURE OF THE APPEAL:

 

This is an appeal under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act).  On June 6, 2005 the requester submitted a request to the Ministry of Children and Youth Services (the Ministry) under the Act for access to the following information:

 

1.       The licensing Module database for all licensed childcare programs, part of the Ministry’s System Management Information System.

2.       The Special Occurrence Reporting System database.

3.       Copies of all complaints against Ontario daycare facilities between January, 2000 and present.

 

 

No further mediation was possible and this matter proceeded to adjudication.  I have issued a Notice of Inquiry to the Ministry concerning the issues of the fee estimate and the request for a fee waiver.  I will continue to adjudicate that part of the appeal.  This order concerns parts 1 and 2 of the request, to which the Ministry has not responded.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

DEEMED REFUSAL

 

Section 29(4) of the Act states:

 

A head who fails to give the notice required under section 26 or subsection 28(7) concerning a record shall be deemed to have given notice of refusal to give access to the record on the last day of the period during which notice should have been given.

 

I wrote to the Ministry on February 3, 2006 and stated:

 

As regards parts one and two of the request, I note that the Ministry is in a position of “deemed refusal” by not issuing a decision letter to the requester (now the appellant) within the time period set out in section 26 of the Act.

 

…

 

The Ministry should immediately issue a decision letter to the appellant if it has not already done so, and forward a copy to my attention.  In the event that I do not receive a copy of this decision letter by Friday, February 10, 2006, I will issue an order requiring one to be issued.

 

To date, I have not received a decision letter from the Ministry regarding parts 1 and 2 of the request.  To ensure that there are no further delays in processing this request on the appellant’s behalf, I am ordering the Ministry to issue a decision letter regarding access to these records.

 

ORDER:

 

1.   I order the Ministry to issue a final decision letter to the appellant regarding parts 1 and 2 of the request, in accordance with the Act and without recourse to a time extension, no later than March 13, 2006.

 

2.   In order to verify compliance with this provision of this order, I order the Ministry to provide me with a copy of the decision letter referred to in Provision 1 when it is sent to the appellant.  This should be forwarded to my attention, c/o Information and Privacy Commissioner/Ontario, 2 Bloor Street East, Toronto, Ontario M4W 1A8.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Original signed by:                                                                        March 6, 2006                                       

John Higgins

Senior Adjudicator

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.