TORONTO, March 25, 2026 /CNW/ - For nearly forty years, Ontarians have had the right to access government-related records at the highest levels. They may not always get all the information they are seeking, but they have the fundamental right to ask, and to have governments' access decisions reviewed by an independent oversight body.
The proposed changes to Ontario's Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA) would diminish the public's right to information by excluding from the law all government records held by the premier, cabinet ministers, parliamentary assistants, and their political staff. This sweeping exclusion, especially when applied retroactively, raises serious concerns about the future of Ontarians' rights to transparency, privacy, and independent oversight.
The Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario (IPC) issued its first statement on this proposal on March 13, 2026. This update provides factual information in response to the various reasons that have since been offered for the proposed change.
Fact 1: Excluding the highest levels of government records from FIPPA is not modernization. Modernization is achieved through improving efficiency and service delivery, not by rolling back transparency rights that Ontarians have relied on for decades. There are many other potential solutions that would be far more effective in modernizing FIPPA, such as more streamlined freedom of information (FOI) processes, proactive disclosures of frequently requested information, and creative use of modern technology.
Fact 2: Personal information of constituents, confidential commercial information, and cabinet confidences are already protected under FIPPA. FIPPA contains well-established exemptions that have long prevented such information from being disclosed in response to an access to information request. For nearly four decades, the IPC has issued many decisions upholding or partially upholding government's use of such exemptions. Moreover, a recent Supreme Court of Canada decision that expanded the scope of cabinet confidences should provide government with ample assurance.
Fact 3: Personal emails and personal devices should never be used to conduct government-related business. This is one of the most important lessons that emerged from the Greenbelt matter. Government officials should conduct government-related business on their government-issued email account and devices. If they instead use their personal email accounts and devices for such a purpose, then any government-related information should immediately be transferred to their official government accounts, subject to proper record-keeping requirements, privacy and security protections, and fair public scrutiny.
Fact 4: Removing records from FIPPA would increase cybersecurity risks to these records.
By excluding the premier, cabinet ministers, parliamentary assistants, and their political staff, these government officials would no longer be statutorily required under FIPPA to protect their records using reasonable physical, administrative and technical safeguards. Instead, sensitive government related information, including sensitive personal information, would remain in their unsecure personal email accounts and devices, increasing the risks of cyberattacks. These risks are further amplified when government officials keep these personal email accounts and devices after they leave government.
Fact 5: Ontario's FIPPA is consistent with the laws of many other Canadian jurisdictions. This includes British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland and Labrador, and the Yukon. As a general rule, all these laws apply to records held by ministers and their staff, subject to clearly established exceptions. Even the federal access to information law has been interpreted by the Supreme Court of Canada in a manner consistent with how Ontario's current FIPPA is applied.
Fact 6: Access to information about government-related business matters to all Ontarians. Ontario processed 27,344 provincial FOI requests in 2024, only 1,092 (4 per cent) of which came from the media. By contrast, more than 95 per cent of requests were submitted by individuals, businesses, researchers, and community organizations. Whether Ontarians seek out government-related information directly or access it through intermediaries like the media, they have a right to know how and why government decisions are made, who influenced them, and how their public money is being spent on important matters affecting their lives.
Quotes
"Taking away Ontarians' access rights -- retroactively and into the future -- denies them the information they need to understand government decision-making at the highest levels and hold their governments to account. Such a change would not modernize access laws, strengthen privacy, or enhance security; it would weaken transparency and accountability for generations to come. This should be concerning for all Ontarians, regardless of political affiliation. We urge the government to reconsider its proposal and keep public trust onside."
--Patricia Kosseim, Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario
Additional Resources
- Comparison of minister's offices subject to access laws in Canada
- Statement from Commissioner Patricia Kosseim on proposed changes to Ontario's Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
- Ontario steps back into the information dark ages
- Ontario (AG) v. Ontario (Information and Privacy Commissioner) 2025 ONSC 7099 (Ont. Div. Ct)
- IPC order PO-4756-F and PO-4577-F
- IPC order PO-4639-I and PO-4640-I
- Special Greenbelt Report, 2024
- Deleting Accountability: Record Management Practices of Political Staff - A Special Investigation Report
SOURCE Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner/Ontario

Media contact: [email protected]
Share this article