Finally, an opportunity to sink our teeth into a REAL, honest to goodness home delivery of an FOI, with all the trimmings, instead of hundreds of thousands of BLANK pages sent by Amrik Virk.
Elizabeth Denham, Information and Privacy Commissioner for BC
October 26, 2015 Question Period
Hon. A. Virk: The directive by the Premier was quite clear. The member opposite certainly doesn't want to try to understand or even try to think about it. The directive is quite clear. Regardless of whether a sent e-mail is transitory or not — whether or not it is transitory — a directive has been sent to all ministers, all ministers' staff, and in fact, that has been extended to parliamentary secretaries as well. That is until Mr. Loukidelis has an opportunity to examine the 11 recommendations, to provide guidance on how to take action. We are committed to work with Mr. Loukidelis and take action on all of those recommendations.Would the words of Virk, 'extended to parliamentary secretaries' imply that they have ALWAYS been EXEMPT from orders on high, say at the BC Liberal Party Office? Back Channeling communications too, were EXEMPT? Brian Bonney was EXEMPT?
4th Session Blues Debates of the BC Legislature too
Hansard Blues The Report October 22, 2015
Update on BC Legislature Triple-O-Delete Window Dressing
October 27, 2015 Hansard Blues Question Period
J. Horgan: It always amazes me that when we come in here, it's as if the Liberal government was just born yesterday. There is a sucker born every minute, but it's not the people of British Columbia. They smell a rat. They know something's amiss here, and they're not going to be satisfied with the Premier taking one line about transitory documents out of a 60-page report and claiming that that's the reason we delete everything that comes through our office. Not acceptable.
Let's go through the greatest hits of openness and transparency on the Premier's watch. Mr. Dyble, her handpicked deputy minister, oversaw the investigation of a guy named Ken Boessenkool, who was removed from government — a human resources matter. I think anyone who's worked in the public sector or the private sector understands that when you dismiss someone, you usually come up with something more than a Post-it Note. But when we asked for information about Mr. Boessenkool's departure? No records found.
Marcia McNeil reviewed the despicable treatment of health care researchers in this province, and when we asked for Mr. Dyble's records on that, we had: "No records found." In fact, in Ms. McNeil's report, she was unable to come to a conclusion on accountability because of the dearth of documents.
It may well be that the Premier is transitory, and I'm hopeful that that's the case, but the documents that belong to British Columbians should be available when they're asked for, and that has not been the case on her watch. The most open and transparent government in British Columbia's history is not overseen by her.
My question to the Premier is again with respect to her own office and her own staff. If Ms. Cadario has no records, is that not inconsistent with what the Premier just said a few months ago? I know it's way back there. You've got to get in the way-back machine to go to May. But in May, she said it wasn't tolerable. Why is it tolerable today?
Hon. C. Clark: As I've said in answer to the member's question already, the Privacy Commissioner has found that there is not a consistent application in the way we treat transitory documents across government. There is no obligation under the act to make sure that all documents — duplicates and transitory documents — are preserved. In fact, the act specifically allows for them to be disposed of because of the cost — and other reasons — of saving them. But we are making sure that no documents that anyone sends are being deleted while Mr. Loukidelis does his work.
Even if the opposition leader doesn't, I certainly welcome Mr. Loukidelis back to British Columbia. He's an expert in this area. He will make sure that we have the guidance and the training that we need for the consistent application all across government as the Privacy Commissioner has told us we need to. We look forward to doing that work, making sure that it is done as quickly, consistently and professionally as possible, and I have every confidence that Mr. Loukidelis is going to help us get there.
We were just reminded by a commentator about one of our previous Posts June 5, 2015
Black Ops Log - 97
Vancouver Police Department Has a Who done it manual on the proper handling of Versadex Security Clearance Private or Invisible channels.
PRIME affords users the opportunity of making either parts of a report or the entire report "Private" or "Invisible". Both these features are powerful tools to control access to sensitive information.
Inappropriate use, however, can have serious consequences to the functioning of the Department by hampering information sharing and the collection of statistics. Members shall meet the requirements stipulated in this section before making a GO report, Flag Record, or Street Check "Private" or "Invisible".
As a policy, members shall refrain from making entire GO reports "Private" or "Invisible" if the objective can be met by making only select parts of the report "Private" or "Invisible".
Making An Entire Report Or A Portion Thereof "Private" (Instructions)
Anyone with police supervisory or police investigative status (or higher) in PRIME is authorized to make an entire report or portion thereof "Private". Anyone else wishing to utilize this feature will have to request a supervisor to approve the use of this feature and make a report or portion thereof "Private".
Before making an entire report or portion thereof "Private", the police investigator or supervisor must ensure that the report meets the following criteria:
a. Information being "privatized" is hold back evidence;
b. Report contains sensitive or confidential information;
c. Report contains low or mid level intelligence information; or
d. A major crime investigation is involved.
Once an entire report or portion thereof is "privatized", only the following individuals will have access to the "privatized" information:
a. Member who "privatized" or requested the "privatizing" of the report;
b. The member’s supervisor;
c. Person/s designated by the member/supervisor; and
d. A default group consisting of Central Records Supervisor/Team Leader (so that reports written by other members can be transcribed), Information and Privacy Unit Co-ordinator and the Source Co-ordinator at CIS.
e. Where the report is requesting charges, the default group consisting of Criminal Records/Police Crown Liaison.
4. Only officers of the rank of Inspector and above may authorize the making of a report or a portion of a report "Invisible".
5. Before making an entire report or portion thereof "Invisible", the requesting member and the approving Officer must ensure that the report meets the following criteria:
a. An investigation involving a VPD employee;
b. Confidential or source information, which if compromised may endanger a person’s life; or
c. Extremely sensitive intelligence information.
6. Any other report/information may be made "Invisible" if approved by a Deputy Chief Constable or the Chief Constable.
7. Once an entire report or a portion thereof is made "Invisible", only the following individuals will have access to the information:
a. Requesting member;
b. Member’s supervisor;
c. Approving Officer; and
d. Any other person/s considered necessary by the officer approving the request.
NOTE: Be aware that a report that has been made "Invisible" in its entirety does not "exist" on RMS except for the people who have been given access to it. Central Records will not be able to transcribe any supplementary information to a record that has been made "Invisible" in its entirety.
Consideration should be given to submitting supplementary reports only through DRE by members who have been permitted access to the "Invisible" file, thus eliminating the transcription queue.
8. Whenever an entire report or portion thereof is made "Invisible", the privatizing member shall notify the Prime System Administrator, of the fact by providing the following information:
a. GO number of report being made "Invisible";
b. Investigating member; and
c. Name of approving Officer.
9. The Records Administrator shall maintain an up-to-date log of all files containing "Invisible" entries and the assigned investigator associated to each file.
10. The Records Administrator shall issue a request every three months through the PRIME system to the approving Officer who shall review the file to determine the need to maintain the "Invisible" status.
11. The approving Officer may grant the Information and Privacy Unit Co-ordinator access to the file, as deemed necessary to enable the Department to comply with the requirements of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
12. If only a portion of a report is made "Invisible", the report will be accessible by all members except for the part of the report that was made "Invisible".
Review of File Status