Stricter Access Rules and Shared Services

Summary#

This bill updates British Columbia’s Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. It tightens what counts as a valid information request, changes response timelines, adds new limits on what can be released, and creates a new system to share personal information across government programs. It also increases the privacy commissioner’s ability to work with other jurisdictions and adds new “proactive release” options for records.

• Requires FOI requests to include enough detail so staff can find records with reasonable effort and time; the head of the public body decides if a request is detailed enough.
• Changes the duty to answer requests from “without delay” to “without unreasonable delay,” and allows time extensions if the requester agrees.
• Excludes records that must be produced or listed in a legal proceeding from FOI access.
• Lets public bodies refuse to release communications from judges to government about policies or laws.
• Creates a “connected services provider” to run online platforms and share personal information between public bodies to deliver services and check eligibility.
• Adds authority for proactive release of some records (including personal records directly to the person) without a formal FOI request.
• Expands when the privacy commissioner can share information with counterparts in other provinces, and lets the commissioner extend review timelines.
• Updates the grounds for the commissioner to let public bodies disregard requests, including when behaviour is abusive or responding would unreasonably disrupt operations.

What it means for you#

• General public

  • Some records will be posted or available directly without filing an FOI request. You may have to pay a copy fee for some public records.
  • If you file an FOI request, you will need to be specific. Vague requests can be refused as lacking detail.
  • Response times aim to be “without unreasonable delay,” which could feel slower or more flexible than “without delay.” You can agree to give the public body extra time.
  • Requests that are repetitive, abusive, or very burdensome may be disregarded with the commissioner’s permission.

• People using government services

  • A new connected services platform may let you access multiple services in one place and help identify benefits or programs you qualify for.
  • Your personal information may be shared more easily between public bodies to deliver those services. The minister can set rules on what data is shared, in what format, and when it can or cannot be shared.
  • Privacy impact assessments must be provided to the commissioner on request for these shared systems.

• Individuals seeking their own records

  • Public bodies and the minister can set categories of personal records that can be given directly to you without a formal FOI request (for example, certain account or case records).

• Journalists, researchers, and advocates

  • You may find it harder to use FOI to access records tied to court or tribunal proceedings; these are excluded.
  • Communications from judges to government about policy or legislation will be off-limits.
  • For research that uses personal information, commissioner approval of the research purpose is no longer required, but approval of the use of the data and how people are contacted is still required.

• People involved in legal disputes with government

  • You cannot use FOI to access records that the government must produce or list as part of a legal proceeding. Those records must be obtained through the court or tribunal process.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

Proponents' View#

• Makes the FOI system more workable by requiring clear, focused requests and reducing abusive or disruptive requests.
• Keeps sensitive judicial communications confidential to protect judicial independence and policy-making.
• Improves service delivery: a connected services platform can streamline access, reduce duplication, and help people find programs they qualify for.
• Strengthens privacy oversight with required privacy impact assessments for integrated systems and clearer rules on data sharing security and sources.
• Increases transparency through proactive release of some records, reducing the need for formal requests.
• Lets the privacy commissioner coordinate with counterparts in other provinces to handle cross-border privacy issues more effectively.

Opponents' View#

• “Without unreasonable delay” may weaken timelines and make it easier for public bodies to take longer to respond.
• Giving heads of public bodies the power to decide if a request has enough detail could lead to more rejected requests and higher barriers for the public and media.
• Excluding records tied to legal proceedings and shielding judges’ policy communications may limit access to information on important public matters.
• Expanding reasons to disregard requests could chill legitimate but complex or broad inquiries.
• The connected services model increases government data sharing; critics worry about privacy risks and the minister’s broad power to direct what data is shared and with whom.
• Allowing fees for copies of proactively released records may create cost barriers to access.