5820-02287 — Public Services and Procurement Canada and House of Commons
The complainant alleged that Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC) improperly withheld information under paragraphs 18(b) and 20(1)(d), and subsection 19(1) of the Access to Information Act, related to the use of Indigenous languages in House of Commons proceedings. The OIC investigation found that the claim under subsection 19(1) was no longer pursued by the complainant. PSPC failed to demonstrate that most of the withheld information met the requirements of paragraphs 18(b) or 20(1)(d), except for per diem rates under paragraph 18(b). However, the Commissioner found that PSPC did not reasonably exercise its discretion when deciding to withhold these per diem rates, as it did not consider all relevant factors, including those favoring disclosure. The Commissioner ordered PSPC to disclose the information improperly withheld under paragraphs 18(b) and 20(1)(d) and to re-exercise its discretion regarding the per diem rates. PSPC agreed to implement the order.
- 1Whether the information met the requirements of s.20(1)(d) ATIA (negotiations by a third party)
- 2Whether disclosure of information could interfere with contractual or other negotiations of a third party under s.20(1)(d) ATIA
- 3Whether there was a reasonable expectation of harm under s.20(1)(d) ATIA
- 4Whether the information met the requirements of s.18(b) ATIA (negotiations by government institutions)
- 5Whether disclosure of estimates for per diem fees could reasonably be expected to interfere with PSPC's negotiations under s.18(b) ATIA
- 6Whether disclosure of other information could reasonably be expected to interfere with negotiations under s.18(b) ATIA
- 7Whether PSPC reasonably exercised its discretion to decide whether to disclose per diem rates under s.18(b) ATIA
- 8Whether PSPC considered all relevant factors for and against disclosure when exercising discretion
- s.19 personal information: Issue not pursued
- s.18(b) financial interests: Exemption not upheld (except per diem)
- s.20(1)(d) third-party information: Exemption not upheld
- Discretion to disclose: Discretion improperly exercised for per diem rates
- Disclosure of records: Records ordered disclosed
- Compliance with order: Institution agreed to implement order
Complaint well founded — disclosure ordered and discretion re-exercised
PSPC failed to demonstrate that most of the withheld information met the requirements of the claimed exemptions. While per diem rates met the requirements of paragraph 18(b), PSPC did not reasonably exercise its discretion by failing to consider all relevant factors, including those favoring disclosure.
The Minister of Public Works and Government Services was ordered to disclose information withheld under paragraphs 18(b) and 20(1)(d) (excluding personal information and per diem rates), and to re-exercise discretion regarding the per diem rates under paragraph 18(b) by considering all relevant factors.
- s.18(b) ATIA
- s.19(1) ATIA
- s.20(1)(d) ATIA
- s.30(1)(a) ATIA
- s.20(5) ATIA
- s.37(2) ATIA
- s.43 ATIA
This summary is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Related by meaning
Decisions with similar reasoning and facts — found by AI across statutes and jurisdictions, not just keywords.
Coverage — 13 of 14 jurisdictions searchable
Fully searchable: Ontario, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Newfoundland and Labrador, Northwest Territories, New Brunswick, Manitoba.
Partial (recent decisions only): Federal (Canada) (651 of 1,631), Nova Scotia (49 of 472), Quebec (6 of 7,090), Prince Edward Island (2 of 279), Yukon (1 of 75).
Coming soon: Nunavut — being re-processed for AI search.
Find decisions like this one — by meaning, not keywords.
Related by meaning is a Pro feature. Upgrade to surface conceptually similar decisions across the corpus, powered by AI.
Upgrade to Pro