A strong freedom-of-information law is a cornerstone of representative democracy. But if the Ford government has its way, those days might be over in the province of Ontario.
The Ford government has introduced sweeping changes to Ontario’s freedom-of-information legislation, with Public and Business Service Delivery and Procurement Minister Stephen Crawford insisting that the new changes are all about “modernizing” Ontario’s freedom-of-information process, which hasn’t been updated in about 40 years.
But the truth is, the proposed changes are all about shielding the government from scrutiny.
The legislation would apply retroactively and would mean that the records of the premier, cabinet ministers, and parliamentary assistants and their offices would no longer be subject to freedom-of-information law.
Members of the public, including the media, would still be allowed to request records held by public servants in government ministries, but the records of political figures would be taken off the table.
Ontario’s information and privacy commissioner, Patricia Kosseim, wasn’t shy about voicing her perspective on the prospective changes.
“Freedom of information laws exist to provide Ontarians with vital information about how government decisions are made, on what basis, who influenced them, and whether the public interest is being served,” said Kosseim. “If records about government business can be shielded from scrutiny simply because they sit in a minister’s office, on a staffer’s device, or within a political account, public accountability is eviscerated.”
Kosseim was also critical about the retroactive nature of the new legislation: the message being sent by this legislation, she argues, is that “if oversight bodies get in the way, just change the rules.”
Media outlets are presently in court trying to access information related to a number of cases, including the Greenbelt scandal and Premier Doug Ford’s personal cell phone records. Should this legislation pass as part of Budget 2026, as is expected, both of those court cases would be impacted and the public may never know vital information.
Crawford is also claiming that his changes will make Ontario’s freedom-of-information law more in line with those of other provinces and the federal government. Even if that is that case, that’s hardly a solid justification for making the government less accountable. Rather, it should draw attention to the fact that other jurisdictions need to become more accountable.
In addition, experts agree that these changes would make Ontario even more opaque than Ottawa.
Under question about Crawford’s proposed changes, Premier Doug Ford tried to place the blame on foreign adversaries.
“We got to protect ourselves against the Communist Chinese that are infiltrating our country – Canada, the U.S., everything – into our education system, into high tech companies. That’s who we have to protect from. So it’s serious, it’s absolutely serious.”
Crawford added to the premier’s comments: “We’re also ensuring that foreign countries, foreign companies, which have been taking advantage of our openness through predatory information gathering, will no longer be able to do so.”
The idea that foreign adversaries are using Ontario’s freedom-of-information regime to threaten the province should be taken seriously. But scrutiny of the proposed legislation simply points to this supposed threat as a red herring.
The most potentially damaging information that could get out is information that is subject to Cabinet confidence – and that has always been shielded from the public. Records that have security implications are already shielded from the freedom-of-information process.
Plus, under the new rules, foreign adversaries could still use “predatory information gathering” by submitting freedom-of-information requests for civil servants’ records, so the Ford government’s changes can’t rule out that possibility entirely.
The Ford government appears to be trying to use the threat of foreign interference to try to justify draconian changes to freedom-of-information rules that are working well. Based on the government’s rhetoric, foreign threats could be used as a pretext to shield virtually any government information from scrutiny.
The reality is, in a representative democracy, there is information that should be accessible to the public. It has always been the case that information that is publicly accessible could be accessed by a foreign adversary. But that’s the nature of public information.
Recent polling has also shown that these proposed changes are unpopular with Ontarians. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation commissioned a poll by Leger and found that, among those decided on the issue, 77 per cent of Ontarians oppose the Ford government’s proposed changes to the province’s freedom-of-information law.
The Ford government needs to do a serious rethink on its proposed reforms. Not only are the proposed changes wrong on principle and unpopular with Ontarians, but they will also hobble the Progressive Conservatives when another party takes over Queen’s Park.
Ford’s Tories might be in government now, but one day another party will be in charge. And the Progressive Conservatives will rue the day when they made access to crucial information virtually impossible for the opposition, the media, or the public to access.
The Ford government’s changes are both rushed and wrongheaded. Ford and Crawford should go back to the drawing board with their proposed reforms. Or, better yet, leave the province’s current legislation alone.
Jay Goldberg is the Canadian Affairs Manager at the Consumer Choice Center. He previously served as the Ontario Director at the Canadian Taxpayers Federation and a policy fellow at the Munk School of Public Policy and Global Affairs. Jay holds a Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Toronto.
