Category: Privacy Page 1 of 12

The Information Commissioner’s Report on the Government of Alberta’s War on the Public’s Right to Access Information

On May 30, 2025

Matter Commented On: OIPC Investigation Report F2025-IR-01, Investigation into the Government of Alberta’s practices respecting access to information

PDF Version: The Information Commissioner’s Report on the Government of Alberta’s War on the Public’s Right to Access Information

On 8 May 2025, Alberta’s Information Commissioner (Commissioner) posted Investigation Report 2025-01 (Report 2025-01). Report 2025-01 is unlike typical Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (OIPC) orders that make decisions about particular records requests under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, RSA 2000, c F-25 (FOIP). Instead, Report 2025-01 relates to how the 27 government departments that make up the Government of Alberta were handling records requests in general. Report 2025-01 concludes that the Alberta government had been applying incorrect interpretations of three sections of FOIP to improperly reject records requests (at 3).

The Online Harms Bill – Part 2 – Private Messaging

By Sanjampreet Singh

On June 14, 2024

In Internet Law, Privacy

By: Sanjampreet Singh and Emily Laidlaw

Matter Commented On: Online Harms Bill C-63

PDF Version: The Online Harms Bill – Part 2 – Private Messaging

This is the second in a series of posts about the Online Harms Bill C-63, proposed federal legislation the stated aims of which are to reduce harmful content online, hold social media platforms accountable, promote safety and child protection, empower users and victims, and increase transparency.

This post examines the social media services that would be regulated by the proposed Online Harms Act (Act) and potentially investigated by the Digital Safety Commission. More specifically, this post focuses on what is excluded from this Bill – private messaging – a “wicked problem” in online harms where one is damned if you do or damned if you don’t include it. We propose a middle path.

Albertan Waits: One Thousand and Three Hundred Delays

By Drew Yewchuk

On April 24, 2024

In Access to Information, Privacy

By: Drew Yewchuk

Case Commented on: Alberta Energy v Alberta (IPC), 2024 ABKB 198 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Albertan Waits: One Thousand and Three Hundred Delays

Alberta Energy v Alberta (IPC), 2024 ABKB 198 (CanLII) is another decision relating to attempts to use the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, RSA 2000, c F-25 (FOIP) to obtain records from Alberta Energy about their May 2020 decision to rescind the Coal Development Policy for Alberta (1976). Nigel Bankes described the initial rescission of the policy here and the reinstatement in February 2021 here.

The circumstances in Alberta Energy v Alberta (IPC) are an outrageous example of how Alberta’s elected officials exploit weaknesses in FOIP to conceal how government decision-making works to keep Albertans misinformed or disinformed.

The Department of Energy and Minerals Finally Releases the Text of a Ministerial Order Delegating Technical CCS-Related Decision-Making Authority to the Alberta Energy Regulator

By Nigel Bankes

On January 29, 2024

In Carbon Capture and Storage, Privacy

By: Nigel Bankes

Matter Commented On: Minister of Energy, Ministerial Order 060/2023, Delegating certain powers of the Minister under the Mines and Minerals Act and the Carbon Sequestration Tenure Regulation, to persons holding particular positions within the Alberta Energy Regulator, April 25, 2023

PDF Version: The Department of Energy and Minerals Finally Releases the Text of a Ministerial Order Delegating Technical CCS-Related Decision-Making Authority to the Alberta Energy Regulator

On April 25, 2023 Peter Guthrie, then Minister of Energy for the Province of Alberta, signed Ministerial Order 060/2023 delegating certain of the Minister’s powers with respect to carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects to staff within the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER). In my view this, in principle, is a sound decision and reflects the recommendations made by the Steering Committee of Alberta’s Regulatory Framework Assessment more than a decade ago. In the interests of transparency, I disclose that I was a member of that Committee. The Committee took the view that while the Department of Energy (now the Department of Energy and Minerals) should have responsibility for decisions related to carbon sequestration tenure and broad questions of policy, responsibility for the more technical decisions related to a CCS project, such as the conditions for issuing a closure certificate, should be made by the AER. The distinction between these different types of decisions had been blurred with the adoption of the CCS amendments to the Mines and Minerals Act, RSA 2000, c M-15 (MMA) in 2010.

Information Shall be Released: The Long Wait for Access to Government Information in Alberta

By Drew Yewchuk

On January 17, 2024

In Privacy

By: Drew Yewchuk

Decision Commented on: University of Alberta (Re), 2023 CanLII 122872 (AB OIPC)

PDF Version: Information Shall be Released: The Long Wait for Access to Government Information in Alberta

This post is another installment in the Public Interest Law Clinic’s work on improving access to government information in Alberta. See previous posts here, here, here, and here.

Re University of Alberta, OIPC Order F2023-46 is a decision of an adjudicator at the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (OIPC), the administrative review body for Alberta’s Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, RSA 2000, c F-25 (FOIP). The decision draws out an important principle of access to government records: that no refusal of access ought to be permanent. Eventually, all government records should become public. This post provides the basics of when exceptions to disclosure expire and when a request can be usefully re-filed to obtain previously-redacted information.