http://www.leg.bc.ca/cmt/37thparl/session-5/foi/reports/Rpt-FOIPPA37-5.pdf
FIFTH SESSION, THIRTY-SEVENTH PARLIAMENT
MAY 2004
ENHANCING THE PROVINCE'S PUBLIC SECTOR AND PRIVACY LAW
SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO REVIEW THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND
PROTECTION OF PRIVACY ACT
The Committee received a few requests to extend the scope of coverage to those entities no
longer qualifying as public bodies under the Act. In particular, it was suggested that the
records of former Crown corporations needed to be accessible. While we would not normally
condone the practice of exempting the entire records of a public-private entity, because of its
negative impact on access rights, we have come to the conclusion that the decision to extend or
reduce the scope of the Act is a decision to be made by the governing party, rather than private
members serving on an all-party parliamentary committee.
One case of exclusion, though, deserves special mention. The Committee was asked to
consider bringing the B.C. Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (BCSPCA) under
the scope of the Act due to the problems some individuals involved in the animal rights
movement have experienced obtaining records of its activities. Upon further inquiry, we
learned that the society has a unique status in terms of its organizational structure. The
BCSPCA is a not-for-profit and mainly self-funded society organized under the Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals Act (R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 372). This statute enables the society to provide
animal welfare services through its administration centre, branches or shelters, or authorized
agents.
The Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries provides a small annual grant ($71,500)
specifically for the training of animal cruelty investigators. However, it has no authority to
regulate the society's activities, except to require it to properly uphold an individual's civil
rights when exercising its investigative powers under the Act. Municipalities have more
regulatory power, under the legislation, through their contracts with the society to provide
pound services.
From the Committee's perspective, it is clear that the BCSPCA is an anomaly. On the one
hand, it is a public body in terms of having statutory authority to deliver its animal welfare
services. On the other hand, its legal status as a non-profit society exempts its records from the
purview of the Act. Therefore we would urge the government to look into this matter.
Recommendation No. 3 —Investigate why the B.C. Society for the Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals was assigned the dual status of a public body and a non-profit
society in the first place and whether there is a case for clarifying or even changing its
status.