Last month, I filed three Freedom of Information requests with the province’s Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development that had been written by ChatGPT in line with my instructions. This was a first for me.
AI is already with us. It combs through minutes and agendas in seconds, work that would have taken hours. It can craft Freedom of Information requests with the skill of a first-class lawyer. It can make mistakes but so, too, can lawyers.
What happened to the reform of the law on Non-Disclosure Agreements? 
Almost three years ago, on 22 November 2023, Newmarket-Aurora’s PC MPP, Dawn Gallagher Murphy, told MPPs at Queen's Park the Governmemnt planned to reform the law on non-disclosure agreements (NDAs). (Photo right)
NDAs are often used to gag employees who have suffered, for example, sexual harassment or bullying at the hands of their employer. In 2023, the Canadian Bar Association called for a change in the law
“to discourage use of NDAs to silence victims and whistleblowers in cases of discrimination, abuse and harassment”.
Gallagher Murphy said the Government would be consulting on restricting the use of non-disclosure agreements:
“… to help end workplace misconduct and hold abusers to account, our government is proposing to conduct consultations and detailed analysis on the use of non-disclosure agreements—NDAs—in the settlement of cases of workplace sexual harassment, misconduct or violence. The consultation would identify legislative options to restrict the use of NDAs while protecting the rights of victims and survivors. Ninety-four per cent of Canadian Bar Association members recently voted in favour of discouraging the widespread use of NDAs in settlement of cases of harassment and discrimination.”
She continued:
“There are concerns within the legal and survivor communities about the adverse impact of using NDAs. Signing an NDA could prevent survivors from talking about their experience and protect perpetrators unjustifiably. However, prohibiting or limiting NDAs could be a disincentive to settlement, forcing more matters of this nature to litigation. Consultation with the legal community, survivors and employers would support a more complete assessment of risk and benefits.”
Since then all we hear is radio silence.
Bullying and Harassment
In January 2025, Newmarket Today published an explosive piece detailing the bullying and harassment dished out by Gallagher Murphy to her office staff.
The action against the MPP brought by former Office Manager, Teena Bogner, was settled before the matter came up before the Ontario Labour Relations Board at a meeting scheduled for 9.30am on 25 February 2025.
All this begs the question, why has the proposal to reform the law on NDAs stalled? I am trying to find out. But I have no way of knowing what I’ll get and how much will be redacted.
Information is power
A cliché but true, nonetheless.
Our ability to get information from the state is fundamental to our democracy. Openness and transparecy promote good governance. Freedom of Information (FoI) requests can reveal maladministration and misconduct. They can show how important policy decisions are made – after careful consideration or on the fly. With supporting evidence or without.
I have been filing FoIs for decades. My most consequential FoI, filed in the UK in 2007, unmasked Michael Ashcroft, then Vice Chair of the Conservative Party, as a tax cheat. He entered the House of Lords in 2000 after promising to pay UK taxes on his worldwide income – not just the portion generated in the UK. He never did. (Photo right) 
The Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 now prohibits membership of the UK Parliament (meaning in this context the House of Lords) to anyone who does not pay UK taxes on the entirety of their income.
Secret Newmarket
Here in Newmarket, FoIs have also revealed facts the powers-that-be would have preferred to stay hidden. In 2015 we learned the Town of Newmarket had considered - in closed session in 2008 - an offer to buy the 144-acre Glenway Golf Course. It was the bargain of the century. But it was rejected by the then Mayor, Tony Van Bynen. He has never spoken publicly about this decision in the intervening 18 years. In 2010, the developer, Marianneville, bought the Glenway lands for $9.9M (about $14.3M in today’s dollars).
Bob Forrest’s plans to demolish sections of the Town’s historic Main Street and build an out-of-place 9 storey condo triggered a cascade of FoIs from a number of concerned residents. The Town rejected Forrest’s proposal with only the then Mayor, Tony Van Bynen, voting in favour.
Freedom of Information requests revealed Southlake’s plans (since changed) to build its second Acute Hospital on protected Greenbelt land north of Davis Drive West and Bathurst.
Other FoIs directed at the Town’s Library exposed a dysfunctional organisation whose Chief Executive was making it up (the membership statistics) as she was going along.
Getting these FoIs answered sometimes comes at a price. I have been quoted an eye-watering $450 by the Ministry of Labour to answer (in whole or in part) just one of my three FoIs on non-disclosure agreements.
Can our Freedom of Information laws be made to work as intended?
There has been a long debate on how we can make our Freedom of Information laws work as intended. The Ford Government is doing everything it can to restrict their scope and applicability.
Earlier this year, the Ford Government used the budget Bill (Bill 97, the Plan to Protect Ontario Act (Budget Measures) 2026) to make consequential changes to the Province’s Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA).
This omnibus Bill removed whole categories of political office records from the scope of FIPPA – and made the change retroactive. Ontario’s Information and Privacy Commission said the practical effect of the change takes things back to 1988, the beginning of the province’s access-to-information regime. And the new exclusions shield the records of parliamentary assistants like Dawn Gallagher Murphy.
The Information and Privacy Commissioner, Patricia Kosseim, objected but was unable to feed her views directly into the legislative process. The Bill had no Committee stage.
Because of this, the Commissioner and others with interest and expertise in the subject had no opportunity to voice their concerns face-to-face with MPPs before Ford's highly controversial changes became the law of Ontario.
The Commissioner - an officer of the Legislative Assembly no less - couldn't have been more blunt:
“Taking away Ontarians’ access rights — retroactively and into the future — denies them the information they need to understand government decision-making at the highest levels and hold their governments to account. Such a change would not modernize access laws, strengthen privacy, or enhance security; it would weaken transparency and accountability for generations to come. This should be concerning for all Ontarians, regardless of political affiliation. We urge the government to reconsider its proposal and keep public trust onside.”
Ford carried on regardless, bulldozing his changes through the legislature with the unwavering support of Newmarket-Aurora’s PC MPP, Dawn Gallagher Murphy.
Pretty predictable, I'd say.
It's not as if she has anything to hide.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.