TORONTO - The Information and Privacy Commissioner has mis-stated the position taken by the University of Toronto in a recent case involving records belonging to Victoria University, a separately controlled and managed institution.

The University of Toronto is fully committed to the principles of openness and transparency set out in the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act). Neither the President of the University of Toronto nor the President of Victoria University has any objection to bringing Victoria University under the Act. Rather, the issue at hand is that the University of Toronto has no authority to access the records of a separate and independent institution such as Victoria University. They are neither in its custody nor its control. The University of Toronto is not the conduit to these records.

The records in question are records about the United Church archives. The University of Toronto has nothing to do with the United Church archives and it has never even seen the records. They were and are the exclusive responsibility of Victoria University, which is - notwithstanding its affiliation with the University of Toronto - separately governed and managed, and has its own assets, employees and records.

If the Government wishes the Act to cover Victoria University it can do so simply by adding Victoria University to a list of covered institutions by regulation to the legislation. The University repeatedly made this point to the IPC in its submissions.

Contrary to the Commissioner's views, the University of Toronto would be derelict in its duty if it did not bring the legal issue in this case to the courts for review. Judith Wolfson, Vice-President, University Relations: "In following the Commissioner's Order, the University would have to make decisions regarding records it has never seen, and that are within the exclusive control of an independent entity. This outcome, quite apart from the question of its legality, would lead to significant increases in costs, would be inefficient, and would undermine the very principles that underlie the Act."

Ironically, the University of Toronto and the IPC agree on two fundamental points:

First, we agree with the principles of openness and transparency and that the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act should cover Victoria University.

Second, we agree that litigation in this matter would be a waste of resources. It is unfortunate that the IPC has created this impasse by issuing and reissuing an Order that we cannot legally follow.

The University is disappointed that the Commissioner has chosen to use such inappropriate and inaccurate language to describe a legal position, taken in good faith, and in the best interests of the University and the principles underlying the legislation. Contrary to the Commissioner's suggestion, the University of Toronto was never given the opportunity to engage in mediation, and while we remain open to all efforts towards a resolution, we have been left with no choice but to seek the assistance of the courts in reviewing a fundamentally flawed decision.