Legislative Assembly of Alberta The 27th Legislature Third Session Standing Committee on Health Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act Review Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:30 a.m. Transcript No. 27-3-12 Legislative Assembly of Alberta The 27th Legislature Third Session Standing Committee on Health McFarland, Barry, Little Bow (PC), Chair Pastoor, Bridget Brennan, Lethbridge-East (AL), Deputy Chair Bhardwaj, Naresh, Edmonton-Ellerslie (PC)* Blakeman, Laurie, Edmonton-Centre (AL)** Forsyth, Heather, Calgary-Fish Creek (WA) Groeneveld, George, Highwood (PC) Horne, Fred, Edmonton-Rutherford (PC) Lindsay, Fred, Stony Plain (PC) Notley, Rachel, Edmonton-Strathcona (ND) Olson, Verlyn, QC, Wetaskiwin-Camrose (PC) Quest, Dave, Strathcona (PC) Sherman, Dr. Raj, Edmonton-Meadowlark (PC) Taft, Dr. Kevin, Edmonton-Riverview (AL) Vandermeer, Tony, Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview (PC) * substitution for Fred Horne ** substitution for Kevin Taft Department of Service Alberta Participants Cheryl Arseneau Director, Policy and Governance Di Nugent Director, Legislative and FOIP Services Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner Participant Marylin Mun Assistant Commissioner Support Staff W.J. David McNeil Clerk Louise J. Kamuchik Clerk Assistant/Director of House Services Micheline S. Gravel Clerk of Journals/Table Research Robert H. Reynolds, QC Law Clerk/Director of Interparliamentary Relations Shannon Dean Senior Parliamentary Counsel/Clerk of Committees Corinne Dacyshyn Committee Clerk Jody Rempel Committee Clerk Karen Sawchuk Committee Clerk Rhonda Sorensen Manager of Corporate Communications and Broadcast Services Melanie Friesacher Communications Consultant Tracey Sales Communications Consultant Philip Massolin Committee Research Co-ordinator Stephanie LeBlanc Legal Research Officer Diana Staley Research Officer Rachel Stein Research Officer Liz Sim Managing Editor of Alberta Hansard Transcript produced by Alberta Hansard October 13, 2010 Health HE-669 9:30 a.m. Wednesday, October 13, 2010 I would like to note that our deputy chair, Bridget Pastoor from Title: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 HE Lethbridge-East, is unable to be with us today. She’s had a personal [Mr. McFarland in the chair] thing happen to her assistant, and she’s got some personal matters to take care of. Our thoughts are with Bridget and her assistant. The Chair: Good morning, everyone. I’d like to call the meeting to We will be joined later by Mrs. Forsyth from Calgary. She’s order. As we’ve done in the past, we’re going to introduce ourselves going to be on teleconference, but at this point I don’t believe she’s for the record. Would those members substituting for any of the hooked up yet. I’m sure Hansard is going to give us a thumbs up current committee members please indicate for the record today who when she’s with us. you are and who you’re substituting for? With that, approval of the agenda that we have today. Are there Welcome to all our helpful staff and department people as well. any items that anyone would like to add under other business? Yes? Good morning to Hansard, and thanks for being here. Let’s start with our committee clerk. Ms Blakeman: I have sought a couple of times to have a short discussion about the effect of putting act reviews through the Mrs. Sawchuk: Karen Sawchuk, committee clerk. standing policy committee process. If we could have a short discussion about that at that point in the agenda, I’d appreciate it. Mr. Quest: Good morning. Dave Quest, MLA, Strathcona. The Chair: Okay. Could we add that on, committee clerk? Mr. Olson: Good morning. Verlyn Olson, Wetaskiwin-Camrose. Mrs. Sawchuk: Yes. Dr. Massolin: Good morning. Philip Massolin, committee research co-ordinator, Legislative Assembly Office. The Chair: Then could I have a motion that the agenda for October 13 of the Standing Committee on Health, subject to . Ms LeBlanc: Stephanie Leblanc, legal research officer with the Legislative Assembly Office. Ms Notley: So moved. Ms Nugent: Good morning. Di Nugent, Service Alberta. The Chair: Ms Notley has moved it. All in favour? Carried. I’m just going to make a few comments here. We’re continuing Ms Arseneau: Cheryl Arseneau, Service Alberta. this review, that started on Wednesday, September 29, on the issues that were identified by the committee during the submissions and Ms Mun: Good morning. Marylin Mun, assistant commissioner oral presentations processes and the resulting proposed recommen- with the office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner. dations. Members should have a copy of the summary of those issues, the compilation document with yellow highlighting on the Ms Blakeman: Good morning, everyone. My name is Laurie cover page. If you don’t have one of these updated documents, Blakeman, and I’d like to welcome each and every one of you to my would you please notify the committee clerk now, and she’ll fabulous constituency of Edmonton-Centre. circulate it. If you’ve had a chance to review the document, you’ll notice that Ms Notley: Good morning. Rachel Notley, Edmonton-Strathcona. the decisions made by the committee have been identified as carried, Unfortunately for us, we’re not there right now. defeated, or withdrawn. The issues not yet considered or deferred have been highlighted in yellow. Please note that a correction was Mr. Vandermeer: Morning. Tony Vandermeer, Edmonton- made to the motion by Ms Notley under issue 14 at the top of page Beverly-Clareview. 4. The decision should read “defeated.” The corrected document was posted at 3 p.m. yesterday. Mr. Bhardwaj: Good morning. Naresh Bhardwaj, MLA, I’d like to suggest that we continue with our review now, starting Edmonton-Ellerslie, substituting today for Fred Horne. with issue 5 on page 2 of the compilation document, and I would with your concurrence like to call on Ms Notley to bring forward Mr. Groeneveld: Good morning. George Groeneveld, Highwood. each of her recommendations. It would be very expedient if somebody could move the motion on these yellow highlighted Mr. Lindsay: Good morning. Fred Lindsay, Stony Plain. documents, and then we can get into the discussion. With that, unless there are any questions, I’d like to turn the floor The Chair: Good morning. I’m Barry McFarland from the fabulous over to Ms Notley. constituency of Little Bow. I want to make special note that our Member for Highwood and Ms Notley: Thank you. Well, in this area of section 5 there are myself have hopefully got some family providing food for the three recommendations that deal generally with an issue that we’ve masses on a nice, sunny day while the combines, hopefully, are grappled with in a bunch of different sections throughout this. running. Having taken the time now to go over the submissions that identified these issues as well as some of the history with respect to it and how Mr. Groeneveld: Right. it’s been addressed in different jurisdictions as well as some of the information that Ms Mun had provided to us when we talked about Ms Blakeman: I’m sorry. I neglected to say that I’m substituting in it sort of tangentially at previous meetings, I would like to propose for Dr. Taft for the duration of the examination of the FOIP Act that I think there may be a way to deal with all three of them in one review. Thank you. fell swoop by adjusting the approach one would take to it. Let me just give you a bit of background to that. The concern is, The Chair: Thank you. of course, that when there are service providers, particularly for- HE-670 Health October 13, 2010 profit service providers, that are providing government service in a in B.C. had made this recommendation. They had that decision just variety of different ways under a variety of different arrangements, come down quite recently, and they said that that was against what those records inadvertently end up getting shut behind a closed door they were trying to do. Hence, my recommendation. Does that because they are either not considered a public body or, alterna- make sense? tively, because the public body is not deemed to have care and control of those records. Now, Ms Mun had previously said that, Ms Blakeman: Are you putting a motion on the floor? you know, this really isn’t a problem because we typically say that any sort of service provider who would fit the broader definition of Ms Notley: Yes. I would therefore move that in order to deal with employee under the act of the government would; their documents recommendations 7, 8, and 15 together, this committee recommend are deemed to be in the care and control of the public body, which that the act be amended to clarify that records created by or in the is fine. custody of a service provider under contract to a public body are As I was sort of looking through how I would deal with these under the control of the public body on whose behalf the contractor three recommendations, our researcher in our office had a chance to provides services. have a conversation with Ms Mun and to find the source of that guarantee that those documents are deemed to be under the care and The Chair: Ms Notley, would you have a copy of that for the control of the public body. Ultimately, Ms Mun was able to provide record, please? us with the 2002 order of the Information and Privacy Commis- sioner. Meanwhile, because one of the presenters who had raised Ms Blakeman: I’m wondering how her proposal differs from one this issue was from B.C. and they referenced the fact that this issue moved earlier that talked about: any record created on behalf of a has been addressed in B.C., we then went and looked at what the public body was deemed to be under the care and control of a public Legislative Review Committee in B.C.