An adjudicator with the office of Ontario’s Information and Privacy Commissioner has denied access to a Ministry of Labour inspector’s reasons for recommending that Occupational Health and Safety Act charges not be laid against an employer after a fatal motor vehicle accident involving the death of eleven people including migrant workers.
The requester wanted a copy of the Ministry of Labour’s “employment safety investigation report”. The MOL granted “partial access”, apparently handing over some parts of the investigation report but not the factors and considerations that went into the inspector’s recommendation that OHSA charges not be laid.
The requester argued that the public interest in safety, and the need to subject MOL enforcement and decisions to public scrutiny, required that the factors and considerations be made public.
The adjudicator refused to grant access to the factors and considerations that went into the inspector’s decision not to recommend OHSA charges. Instead, the information fell squarely within the exemption in section 13(1) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act which provides that advice or recommendations of a public servant need not be disclosed. The public interest did not require disclosure. In fact, the public interest suggested that the information not be disclosed, because otherwise Ministry of Labour inspectors may feel constrained in providing full, free and frank advice.
Ontario (Labour) (Re), 2015 CanLII 31652 (ON IPC)
