RM of Parkdale advised of privacy breach in Commissioner’s report

The report indicates on Jan. 18, 2019, the RM submitted a response to the Commissioner’s Office that under provisions in the Local Authority Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (LA FOIP) it believed it had the authority to release this information. The RM also indicated it believed the breach originated with the surviving spouse.

The Office of the Commissioner’s report references the RM’s March 7, 2018 meeting minutes as containing a great deal of personal information about the individual’s health status, which the Commissioner’s Office states is not necessary for best practices in minute taking.

The report also states in several of the RM meeting minutes, the compensation claim number of the deceased individual is referenced, at times beside the name of the deceased.

As well, the report indicates by publishing the council meeting minutes on its website, the RM disclosed the individual’s personal information contained in those records.

Ultimately, the report from the Commissioner concludes in the investigation that the RM did not have authority to release the deceased’s personal information.

The Commissioner found the RM didn’t properly apply the Local Authority Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (LA FOIP).

In his report, Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner Ronald Kruzeniski recommended the RM ensure its policies and procedures for managing personal information include the best practices, and if it intends to repost its meeting minutes to redact all the deceased individual’s personal information.

“In this instance the issue really comes down to how much information is given in the minutes,” Kruzeniski said in an interview with battlefordsNOW. “You basically have two rules. Best practices would suggest that councils put the least amount of personal information in the minutes as possible. If they can make it referring to the ‘applicant’ or the ‘complainant,’ that is a better way to go.”

Kruzeniski said if the RM feel they have to include some personal information in their minutes, then they need to redact it, switch to initials, or “make it as anonymous as you can make it” when they post it to the website.

“I think those are the two key issues here, leaving information out when minutes are written, or redacting it once you publish it to a website,” he said.

The report stated the RM had authority to disclose some of the deceased’s personal information based on provisions under The Municipalities Act, but it appears that the RM “provided more information to the general public than what was required.”

To follow best practices, the Commission advised the RM to follow these comprehensive four steps.

If an RM council is discussing correspondence or a matter that includes sensitive personal information, for example health or financial details, the RM should provide council members with a redacted version of the personal information, or only the personal information necessary for the discussion. The discussion should also be closed to the general public.

When the meeting is held in open session, when the RM passes a motion it should ensure it is very general with no personal details included.

The RM could refer to the individual in its minutes as an applicant, complainant, taxpayer or ratepayer or use the individual’s initials only. If council includes personal information in its minutes it should redact the personal details before posting anything to its website.

As well, to assist the public in deciding what information to provide the RM, the municipality should have public information available, either pamphlets or on its website, about how the information is collected.

The full report is available on the Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner’s website.

When reached by battlefordsNOW RM of Parkdale Reeve Daniel Hicks confirmed as a small municipality due to limited resources it can be difficult for it to negotiate the involved details of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP Act), and the RM will further review the legislation.

–

angela.brown@jpbg.ca

On Twitter: @battlefordsnow

by Angela Brown

RM of Parkdale advised of privacy breach in Commissioner’s report

What's Trending