Block Review (BR) is the systematic review of a series of archived government records currently held in LAC’s permanent collection. BR was initiated in 2010. A post on the LAC website, dated 11 September 2025, lists 250 projects that examined closed government records to determine whether they could be made public. Each entry includes archival details, sample size, pages reviewed, and final or interim decisions.
Records Successfully Opened (151)
Many projects were completed with records fully released to the public. The Privy Council Office and Canadian Corporation for the 1967 World Exhibition had particularly high success rates, with entire blocks opened when no exemptions were found.
Other significant collections were opened after reviewers identified and redacted information protected under the Access to Information Act. This included substantial holdings from the Department of Trade and Commerce and the Department of Foreign Affairs.
Some blocks containing personal information were released under section 8(3) after review, including records from Finance and Veterans Affairs.
The BR sampling process accelerated decisions. For projects that resulted in release, typical sample rates ranged from 0.9% to 100%, with a median of 10%.
Stopped or Cancelled Reviews (40)
A large portion of reviews were halted when sampling revealed disqualifying content. Common reasons included solicitor-client privilege, affecting records from Finance, Transport, and Treasury Board, and sensitive personal information.
In several cases, initial samples showed no problems, but a deeper review uncovered too many potential exemptions to proceed efficiently.
Administrative & In-Progress
As of 11 September 2025, 27 projects remain incomplete. There were 33 mystery projects, identified only as Unknown/No comment. One review was deemed not possible. Seven reviews were cancelled after discovering the Mikan database had incorrect information, and the records were already public.
It’s unclear how many of the 250 projects date back many years, potentially to 2010. How many are processed quickly and how many may have been languishing, perhaps for years? The BR system isn’t perfect; there is no perfect system. Would you rather err on the side of releasing information that should have been withheld because a sampling process was used, or withhold or delay the release of information that should be available?