ARPA's Al Siebring, interviewed me Friday for their Lighthouse news program, on my case against the Ontario Government. My interview starts just before the half way point.
Our case (in case you've forgotten):
It's that the government, and the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario (IPC), have misinterpreted FIPPA.
Our position is that section 65(5.7) of FIPPA cannot mean a ban on all materials related to the provision of abortion services, but must mean a ban on materials related to the provision of abortion services which contain personal information.
Remember that FIPPA has two goals: to make government documents public, and to protect personal privacy.
The amount of abortions and the cost of those abortions, is not personal information, and so keeping those private, do not match up with the goals of FIPPA.
Section 65(5.7) must then mean, and must have been intended, to cover only materials related to the provision of abortion services which contain personal information. This position supports a constitutional interpretation of FIPPA. Section 2(b) of the Charter protects my right to freedom of expression and freedom of the press.
As a blogger, I benefit from freedom of the press.
In order for me to use my freedom of expression, and comment on issues of public importance, such as abortion and the use of taxpayer dollars, I need access to these documents.
The government and the IPC’s interpretation of section 65(5.7) results in a violation of my freedom of expression. It cannot therefore be a proper interpretation.