For Release July 16, 1999


Manitoba Natural Resources Follows Ombudsman's Office Recommendations

Winnipeg - The Manitoba Ombudsman's Office has completed an investigation into the destruction of audio tape recordings of presentations made during public meetings held by the 1997 Manitoba Water Commission, a commission of Manitoba Natural Resources. Barry Tuckett, the Manitoba Ombudsman, found that this was an unauthorized destruction of records that contravened The Legislative Library Act. This Act sets out a procedure for authorizing the retention and destruction of records of government departments and agencies.

The investigation was launched on the Ombudsman's own initiative after an applicant under The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy was informed that there were no transcripts and that the tapes had been destroyed. The investigation confirmed that the tapes had been destroyed.
 

The Ombudsman made three recommendations to Manitoba Natural Resources in his report dated June 11, 1999:

1. That Manitoba Natural Resources take steps forthwith to ensure that all boards and commissions operating in association with the Department are specifically and routinely informed, in writing, about recordkeeping requirements under Part II, "Public Records and Archives" of The Legislative Library Act and applicable regulations, policies and guidelines.
   
   
2. That Manitoba Natural Resources take steps to ensure that the link between access and privacy rights under The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and The Personal Health Information Act and lawful recordkeeping practices is clearly understood within the department and its associated boards, commissions, associations, and agencies as defined in The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
   
   
3. That Manitoba Natural Resources bring its entries in the Access and Privacy Directory into more ample compliance with the requirements of Section 75 of The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

The written response from Manitoba Natural Resources indicated that these recommendations have been accepted by the Department. Specifically, the Department's response states that it will undertake the following steps, with respect to implementing these recommendations:

• Develop specific policy and procedures that will inform and monitor the recordkeeping practices of boards and commissions that come under its umbrella and which are subject to The Legislative Library Act and The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
  
  
• Re-embark on a program of information dissemination regarding recordkeeping practice and its relationship to legislation
  
  
• Conduct a review of the records scheduling program in light of records that still require scheduling and a review of current schedules that may require changes to bring the scheduling process up to date to comply with Section 75 of The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

In view of the archival disposition of the records, said the Ombudsman, "not only has the applicant been deprived of access to the records for his immediate purposes, but also Manitobans and students of Manitoba's experience over time have been deprived of an historical record of unquestionable importance. That the event concerned has been called 'The Flood of the Century' says it all."

The Ombudsman observed that there is a positive aspect to the incident in that the publicity generated will help alert other provincial government departments and agencies about the recordkeeping requirements of The Legislative Library Act. "While this investigation has focussed on the Manitoba Water Commission and Manitoba Natural Resources," he said, " I have a concern that the lack of adherence to legislated recordkeeping requirements and related policies is not restricted to these particular entities in the Provincial Government. I hope that the message of this investigation and of my recommendations is received broadly through the Government and its entities, " he said.

The Ombudsman's Office will follow up with Manitoba Natural Resources on the implementation of the recommendations to review the Department's progress. The Ombudsman's report will also be provided to the Minister of Manitoba Culture, Heritage and Citizenship who has responsibilities for authorizing the disposition of records through the documents committee process under The Legislative Library Act; for the Directory under The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act; and for reporting on the general administration of these Acts.

 

BACKGROUND

On December 23, 1998, a person applied to Manitoba Natural Resources under The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA) for access to "... written transcripts of all public presentations to the 1997 Manitoba Water Commission." The departmental Access Officer responded on January 15, 1999, to the effect that Natural Resources did not have the records requested, and that copies of the written presentations were being forwarded to the Legislative Library for the public to view without the need for an application for access under FIPPA.

On being informed that transcripts of the public presentations did not exist, the applicant made inquiries with Manitoba Natural Resources and with the Manitoba Water Commission about the audio tapes which were known to have been made. The applicant was told that no transcripts had been made and the audio tapes had been destroyed.

The applicant had wished to review the information further to concerns regarding the actions taken during and after the 1997 Red River flood and about flood compensation. The applicant also expressed profound concern with the alleged loss of the material as an historical record for the people of Manitoba and as an act of "witnessing" for the people who were directly affected by the "Flood of the Century".

As a result of a complaint from the applicant about the denial of access to transcripts, it was confirmed that the audio records had indeed been destroyed. As it appeared that the destruction was not authorized, the Ombudsman initiated an investigation under Part 4 of The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), which states:

General powers and duties
49 In addition to the Ombudsman's powers and duties under Part 5 respecting complaints, the Ombudsman may

1. conduct investigations and audits and make recommendations to monitor and ensure compliance
   
   
   2. with requirements respecting the security and destruction of records set out in any other enactment or in a by-law or other legal instrument by which a local public body acts;

8. make recommendations to the head of a public body or the responsible minister about the administration of this Act;

EXCERPTS FROM THE OMBUDSMAN'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Several Acts of the Manitoba Legislature needed to be considered in the investigation of the alleged unauthorized destruction of these audio records including: The Water Commission Act, The Legislative Library Act and Regulation, and The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

THE MANITOBA WATER COMMISSION

The Water Commission Act provides for the appointment of members to the Manitoba Water Commission, a body which appears to be re-constituted from time-to-time as required. The members and chair of the 1997 Commission were appointed by Order in Council in August, 1997. The Commission is responsible to the Crown through the Minister of Natural Resources according to the organization chart located in the 1998 Access and Privacy Directory, Provincial Government and Government Agencies (the Directory) prepared and distributed by the Government Records Office of the Provincial Archives, Manitoba Culture, Heritage and Citizenship.

The Manitoba Water Commission is an agency of the government under The Legislative Library Act, which provides the following definition:

"agency" and "agency of the government" means any board, commission, association, or other body, whether incorporated or unincorporated, that is established under an Act of the Legislature and all members of which, or all the members of the board of management or board of directors of which,

1. are appointed by an Act of the Legislature or the Lieutenant Governor in Council, and
2. in the discharge of their duties are public officers or servants of the Crown, or for the proper discharge of their duties are, directly or indirectly, responsible to the Crown;

The Commission also falls under FIPPA, which includes a similar but somewhat broader definition of a "government agency".

MANITOBA NATURAL RESOURCES

Manitoba Natural Resources is one of the most "historic" departments of the government. Established in 1928 as the Manitoba Department of Mines and Natural Resources, it was the provincial heir to various responsibilities and records of the federal Department of the Interior. The federal government retained jurisdiction from 1870 to 1930 over the lands and natural resources of what are now the three prairie provinces. The Interior Department was established following passage of the Canada Dominion Lands Act of 1872, and created and accumulated some of the earliest records relating to the Province of Manitoba. In 1930, responsibility for natural resources was transferred to the provinces along with significant records fulfilling a landmark decision for the prairie provinces.

The current role of the Department is laid out in its entry in the Directory:

The Department protects, conserves, manages, and develops the province's forest, fisheries, wildlife, water, Crown land and park resources…. Natural Resources also protects people and property from the adverse effects of natural elements such as floods and wildfires.

PUBLIC RECORDS AND ARCHIVES

Part II, "Public Records and Archives", of The Legislative Library Act (LLA) prescribes processes for the retention and disposition of government records, and is the basis of a comprehensive records management program which has been implemented for the Government of Manitoba. The principles of this Act, supported by numerous policies, guidelines, and practices, recognize the recordkeeping trusteeship of government departments and agencies in safeguarding public records for legal, financial/fiscal, audit, operational, and administrative purposes as well as for their historical and cultural values to the people of Manitoba.

THE PROVINCIAL DOCUMENTS COMMITTEE

The Act establishes a documents committee (section 11[1]), generally known as the Provincial Documents Committee (PDC), to consider the retention and disposition of all records, regardless of physical form or characteristics, which fall under the authority of the legislation. This committee consists of the Deputy Minister of Justice, the Provincial Auditor, the Deputy Minister of Finance, the Deputy Minister of Public Works [now Government Services], and the Provincial Archivist, or their appointees. The Archivist acts as the Chair of the Committee.

The composition of this committee clearly reflects the purposes and values of public records, and each representative is responsible for the broad corporate and public interest in the disposition of government records rather than the narrower interests of their originating department or agency. Needless to say, information is fundamental to effective, efficient, and economical public or private enterprises and to the democratic institutions of our society.

The Annual Report 1997-1998 for Manitoba Culture, Heritage and Citizenship elaborates on the purposes and values of sound recordkeeping practices:

The Provincial Archives serves Manitobans and their institutions by protecting information of fundamental significance to community identities, well-being, individual and collective self-knowledge, and which documents the mutual rights and obligations entered into by society and those whom the people choose to govern. The Archives provides unique services in managing and acquiring government records, preserving them as long as is required, and making them accessible to government and public clients.

PROCESS FOR AUTHORIZED DESTRUCTION OF RECORDS

In accordance with The Legislative Library Act, records shall not be destroyed except as authorized under the Act. The Act states:

Prohibition of destruction or removal of records
12(1) Except as provided herein, or as authorized in the regulations, and notwithstanding any other Act, except The Financial Administration Act, but subject to The Financial Administration Act, no person shall destroy any public records or remove them from the files or offices of a department or agency of the government or from the possession of a department or agency.

The Act sets out the procedure for authorizing the retention and destruction of records. In practice, it is a consultative process between the PDC and the submitting department or agency which is always invited to attend the Committee meeting at which the matter is to be considered.

Meetings
12(4) The documents committee shall meet on the call of the chairman and shall

1. consider any matters referred to it by a department or agency;
2. classify the public records of a department or agency to which the notice relates;
3. prepare a schedule showing the various classifications of those public records, and recommending
   1. which should be retained indefinitely by the department or the agency,
   2. which should be authorized to be destroyed after the public records have been photographed,
   3. which should be authorized to be destroyed without photographing, and
   4. which should be transferred to the branch [the Provincial Archives].

A department or agency prepares a Records Authority Schedule for submission to the PDC. These Schedules describe the records series concerned and recommend retention periods for the Committee's consideration. Either by delegated authority or by recommendation to the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship, the Committee identifies retention and disposal orders for the records including the minimum period of time a record must be retained before destruction is permitted if it is not to be kept indefinitely.

The Regulation Respecting the Preservation of Public Records under The Legislative Library Act states:

6(1) Where the destruction of any public records is authorized under this regulation, destruction shall be by fire or obliteration under the supervision of a senior official of the department or agency concerned.

6(2) In each case, the supervising official shall complete a certificate setting out the nature of the public records, and the date and manner of their destruction.

6(3) All such certificates shall be retained on file in the department or agency as a permanent record.

The Ombudsman noted that, while The Legislative Library Act prohibits the unlawful alienation or destruction of records under section 12, there is no penalty prescribed under the Act. It is of interest that the federal Government's experience with inappropriate or unauthorized destruction of records led to the unanimous passage of a private member's bill in late 1998 that prescribes substantial punishments where there is an intent to deny a right of access to information by the destruction, mutilation, alteration, falsification, creation of a false record, or concealment of a record, or by directing, proposing, counseling or causing any person to do so.

THE LINK BETWEEN ACCESS AND PRIVACY RIGHTS AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

Access and privacy legislation is all about openness, transparency, and the accountability of public bodies. The ability to exercise one's access and privacy rights is dependent on the judicious retention and disposition of information. Part of these rights is to know what information a public body holds, and what is to be done or is being done with this information. These principles are recognized in FIPPA:

Directory
75(1) The responsible minister shall

1. prepare a directory to assist in identifying and locating records in the custody or under the control of public bodies;
2. make every reasonable effort to ensure that the directory is kept up to date;
3. ensure that copies of the directory are made available to public bodies; and ensure that copies of the directory are available to the public through libraries and electronic information networks.

Contents of directory
75(2) The directory must include

1. a description of the mandates, functions and organization of each public body;
2. a description of records, including personal information banks, in the custody or under the control of each public body;

The Ombudsman noted that the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship is the Minister responsible for FIPPA and is also responsible for The Legislative Library Act, under which authority the Provincial Documents Committee operates and whose work is supported by the Government's corporate records management program. The Directory required by FIPPA reflects the disposition of records through the documents committee process indicating what records exist or have existed, how long they are to be kept, and the retention or destruction authorization. In short, the Directory is the cornerstone for the public's right to know.

THE WORK OF THE MANITOBA WATER COMMISSION

The Commission submitted a report dated June, 1998 entitled "An Independent Review of Actions Taken During the 1997 Red River Flood: A Report to the Hon. J. Glen Cummings, Minister of Natural Resources."

As outlined in the report, the "…Commission gathered an immense amount of information in a relatively short period of time. [It] turned to two primary sources [of information] -- the governments, organizations, agencies and local interest groups involved in flood preparation, flood fighting and recovery efforts, and the communities and individuals directly impacted by the Flood of the Century."

During the course of its review, the Commission operated out of a Natural Resources Office in Niverville. The consultation process involved a series of public meetings held in communities in the Red River Valley. As stated in the report of the Commission, the "purpose of these meetings was to consult with, and receive input from, the residents of the Valley as well as others who had been directly affected by the flood." The public meetings were advertised and people wishing to make an oral presentation before the Commission were asked to register in advance through the Commission's office.

The Commission prepared "A Guide to Public Meetings" to assist presenters in the preparation of their oral and written submissions. The Guide states that "[a]lthough the Commission intends to audio record the public meetings, written transcripts will not be made available."

There were ten public meetings held between November 13 and December 16, 1997. The oral presentations made at these public meetings were audio taped. The destruction of these audio tapes has been the subject of the investigation by the Ombudsman's Office.

THE INVESTIGATION BY THE OMBUDSMAN'S OFFICE

The report of the Manitoba Water Commission makes reference to receiving more than 130 presentations during 45 hours of public sessions. During a meeting with the Chair of the Commission, the Ombudsman's Office was advised that the Commission made audio tape recordings of these public presentations and that the purpose of recording the presentations on audio tapes was to assist the Commission in the preparation of its report.

The Commission requested that presenters provide a written copy of their presentation in advance of the public meetings. Evidently, most presenters did submit a written copy of their presentation to the Commission. Copies of these written submissions have been provided to the Legislative Library and the originals should form part of the Commission's records submitted to the PDC.

In addition, noted the Ombudsman, the Commission's consultations with government bodies involved meetings during which these bodies provided, in total, eleven written submissions. It appears that the Commission made copies of these written submissions available to the public at its Niverville office and that these written submissions were provided to the Department, along with other records of the Commission. The Ombudsman's Office review confirmed that these meetings were not recorded on audio tape.

Concerning the issue of other audio recordings made by the Commission, the Chair advised Ombudsman compliance investigators that the Commission had taped its internal Commission meetings. The Ombudsman's Office was informed that the purpose for making these tapes was to assist in the preparation of the minutes of these meetings. As written minutes of these meetings were prepared, it was felt that there was no other purpose for keeping these tapes. These minutes were provided to the Department along with other records of the Commission.

The investigation confirmed that the audio tapes of the presentations made to the Commission at the public meetings were destroyed in July, 1998 in Niverville. The Chair advised that he had asked an employee to destroy the audio tapes of the Commission's meetings, meaning the audio tapes of the internal Commission meetings, which had been transcribed into minutes of these meetings. Apparently, the employee was not aware that, included among the tapes of the internal Commission meetings, there were tapes of the presentations made at the public meetings. All of the Commission's tapes were destroyed. The Chair advised investigators that he was not aware that all of the Commission's tapes had been destroyed until inquiries were made in February, 1999 concerning the tapes of the public presentations.

The Chair of the Commission also advised investigators that he was not aware of the recordkeeping requirements under The Legislative Library Act at the time of the destruction of these records. He indicated that he did not become aware that the destruction of the audio tapes breached this Act until it was reported in the media. During the investigation, the Chair commented that, in retrospect, he would suggest that Commissions of the government be provided with a written statement or guidelines of obligations and requirements under The Legislative Library Act.

In March of 1999, the destruction of the records became the subject of media attention. The Chair of the Commission was quoted as taking responsibility for the destruction. He affirmed this statement during the investigation by the Ombudsman's Office.

The remainder of Commission's records were placed in boxes and turned over to the Department in August of 1998. Apparently the Department reviewed these boxes and began preparing a schedule for these records. The Records Authority Schedule (NR 402) pertaining to the Commission's records was submitted by the Department to the Government Records Office in January, 1999 for the consideration of the Documents Committee. The Ombudsman noted that that the Schedule does not make reference to the audio tapes. The Department stated that it was not aware that audio tapes had existed when the Schedule was being prepared.

Documentary evidence indicates that a first draft of the Schedule was received for comment by the Secretariat to the PDC on August 24, 1998. The records officer for Natural Resources signed a Records Authority Schedule (NR 402) for the Manitoba Water Commission's "Red River Flood Review Files - 1997" on December 14, 1998. This document was signed-off by the Department's delegated authority on January 18, 1999. The records series were described as being textual and for the purpose of recording "the operation of the commission during the Red River Flood Review".

The recommendation from the Department to the PDC was "Transfer to Archives" after five years in the Government Records Centre managed by the Provincial Archives of Manitoba. A retention period in the Records Centre recognizes that certain records may need to be accessed by a public body with some frequency and may even require the temporary return of some of the records to the agency for legal, financial, administrative, or operational purposes. As a rule, once records have been put in the vaults of the Archives, they cannot be removed for off-site viewing except under the most extraordinary circumstances in order to protect the integrity of the records and to ensure their preservation for future use.

The Provincial Documents Committee considered the records schedule on April 27, 1999, and determined that the records of the Water Commission should be transferred in their entirety to the Archives for long-term preservation, including administrative records, because of the significance of the natural and human events involved.

These records fall clearly under various provisions of The Legislative Library Act, Part II, and under section 2 of the Regulation, which provides:

1 All documents relating to the history of the province, or otherwise of a historic value, shall be deemed to be of archival value; and, without restricting the meaning generally to be given to the words "archival value", public records…shall be considered to be of archival value and subject to permanent preservation.

In view of the "archival disposition" of the records, noted the Ombudsman, "not only has the applicant been deprived of access to the records for his immediate purposes, but also Manitobans and students of Manitoba's experience over time have been deprived of an historical record of unquestionable importance. That the event concerned has been called 'The Flood of the Century' says it all."

FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS

The Ombudsman found that the investigation confirmed that the audio tapes of the public meetings and the internal Commission meetings were destroyed in contravention of The Legislative Library Act, as this destruction was not authorized under the Act.

"Our investigation did not disclose any evidence to support a finding that these records were wilfully destroyed," said the Ombudsman. "Rather, the Water Commission was not aware of the recordkeeping requirements under The Legislative Library Act, as sufficient guidance was not provided to the Commission by Manitoba Natural Resources."

When a governing entity or information trustee undertakes a public inquiry into a matter, this alone would seem to be a good signal that there may be both short and long-term interest in the information obtained. Yet, it is probably in the nature of most public bodies to focus on the immediate tasks that are seen as central to their mandate rather than on maintaining good information systems. For such a reason, laws and policies are in place to protect and safeguard information, but these are of little value if they are not properly communicated to people in charge.

"Failure to comply with legislative requirements and sound recordkeeping requirements is not an exception under FIPPA," said the Ombudsman. "While I appreciate that the demands of public service and the conduct of public business may be onerous, information is held as a public trust. This trust is reinforced and supported by numerous Acts of the Manitoba Legislature in one form or another. Openness, transparency, and public body accountability depend on exemplary recordkeeping practices."

The Ombudsman's report continued:

"In the course of the investigation, our office considered the records management practices of the Department and, in particular, of the Water Resources Branch, which would be the component of the Department most closely associated with the records of the Water Commission. This included a review of entries for Natural Resources in the Directory, which suggested that, while some attention has been given to the scheduling of administrative and housekeeping records, the scheduling of operating divisions' records requires attention. The records of the operational components of Natural Resources are, of course, at the very core of the reasons why the Department exists. While we did not conduct an exhaustive inquiry into this matter, the information we obtained from the records of the Secretariat to the PDC leaves me with little doubt that Natural Resources should undertake an early review of its records scheduling process, submit schedules to the Provincial Documents Committee, and implement the schedules without delay.

"Notwithstanding the daily rush of work, the principles that underpin our democratic institutions must not be obscured. In a Supreme Court of Canada decision in 1997 (Dagg v. Minister of Finance et al. File No. 24786), Mr. Justice LaForest observed:

As society has become more complex, governments have developed increasingly elaborate bureaucratic structures to deal with social problems. The more governmental power becomes diffused through administrative agencies, however, the less traditional forms of political accountability, such as elections and the principle of ministerial responsibility, are able to ensure that citizens retain effective control over those who govern them.

The overarching purpose of access to information legislation, then, is to facilitate democracy.

"Because the issue is so fundamental, I emphasize again that the public's right to know includes the right to know what information the government holds. The Directory is a primary and legislated vehicle for fulfilling this right. I also point out that determination of a person's rights and what is the "right thing to do" in a given circumstance may depend on the accumulation of evidence over time. In short, an archival record may be as important to the public's right to know as a more contemporary record. Further, the finality of the destruction of a record from an access-to-information perspective clearly requires the kind of rational and independent review contemplated under The Legislative Library Act through the PDC.

"While this investigation has focussed on the Manitoba Water Commission and Manitoba Natural Resources, I have a concern that the lack of adherence to legislated recordkeeping requirements and related policies is not restricted to these particular entities in the Provincial Government. Undertaking a broad review of provincial departments and agencies in this respect is simply beyond the resources of my office, but I hope that the message of this investigation and of my recommendations is received broadly through the Government and its entities."

OMBUDSMAN'S RECOMMENDATIONS

Our review indicated that the Manitoba Water Commission destroyed the audio tapes of the public presentations in contravention of The Legislative Library Act. It was also apparent from our review that the Commission was not aware of the recordkeeping requirements under this Act and the exclusive responsibilities of the Provincial Documents Committee. It is the duty of this high-level and expert Committee to take into account in its deliberations all laws, policies, and practices in the government as a corporate entity, including The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and The Personal Health Information Act, when considering the long and short-term disposition of records, regardless of physical form or characteristics.

Our review also indicated that the Department's entries in the Directory need to be updated to more accurately reflect the records held by the public body, particularly with respect to records of the operational divisions and branches of Manitoba Natural Resources. This would require that Manitoba Natural Resources undertake a systematic review, on a priority basis, of its records scheduling process, and proceed with obtaining the necessary disposition approvals through the Provincial Documents Committee. This would then enable the Department to ensure that its entries in the Directory reflect what records exist or have existed, how long they are to be kept, and the retention or destruction authorization.

Based on our review, I make the following recommendations:

1. That Manitoba Natural Resources take steps forthwith to ensure that all boards and commissions operating in association with the Department are specifically and routinely informed, in writing, about recordkeeping requirements under Part II, "Public Records and Archives" of The Legislative Library Act and applicable regulations, policies and guidelines.
   
   
2. That Manitoba Natural Resources take steps to ensure that the link between access and privacy rights under The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and The Personal Health Information Act and lawful recordkeeping practices is clearly understood within the department and its associated boards, commissions, associations, and agencies as defined in The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
   
   
3. That Manitoba Natural Resources bring its entries in the Access and Privacy Directory into more ample compliance with the requirements of Section 75 of The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

MANITOBA NATURAL RESOURCES' RESPONSE

In the Ombudsman's Report and Recommendations to Natural Resources dated June 11, a written response was requested within 15 days indicating either:

1. that the head accepts the recommendations and any action the head has taken or proposes to take to implement them, or
   
   
2. the reason(s) why the head refuses to take action to implement the recommendations.

The written response from Manitoba Natural Resources indicated that these recommendations have been accepted by the Department. Specifically, the Department's response stated that it will undertake the following steps to implement the recommendations:

• Develop specific policy and procedures that will inform and monitor the recordkeeping practice of boards and commissions that come under its umbrella and which are subject to The Legislative Library Act and The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
  
  
• Re-embark on a program of information dissemination regarding recordkeeping practices and its relationship to the legislation.
  
  
• Conduct a review of the records scheduling program in light of records that still require scheduling and a review of current schedules that may require changes to bring the scheduling process up to date to comply with Section 75 of The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

FOLLOW-UP TO INVESTIGATION

The Ombudsman's Office will follow-up with Manitoba Natural Resources on the implementation of the recommendations to review the Department's progress.

The Ombudsman's report will also be provided to the Minister of Manitoba Culture, Heritage and Citizenship, who has responsibilities for authorizing the disposition of records through the documents committee process under The Legislative Library Act; for the Directory under The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act; and for reporting on the general administration of these Acts.