Evidence of meeting #46 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was report.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Tom Wappel
The first item on the agenda today is identity theft, but before we get started, I'd like to thank Mr. Tilson for chairing the meeting on Tuesday. I appreciate it very much.
We have with us today Michael Jenkin, co-chair of the consumer measures committee of the Department of Industry, along with David Clarke, co-chair of the identity theft working group, consumer measures committee. Welcome, gentlemen.
I presume you have an opening statement, so please begin.
9 a.m.
Michael Jenkin Co-Chair, Consumer Measures Committee, Department of Industry
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
David and I will be pleased to answer your questions after a brief opening statement. I would also like to remind you that we've left you a package of information from the consumer measures committee, and I'll be referring to some of the documents in that folder in my remarks. It's part of our public information to consumers on identity theft and a few other issues as well.
So thank you, Mr. Chair, for providing the consumer measures committee with the opportunity to discuss its efforts in regard to identity theft. The consumer measures committee, or, as we call it, the CMC--everyone loves an acronym--is a forum of federal, provincial, and territorial officials responsible for consumer affairs. So it's not part of the Department of Industry; it's actually a separate federal-provincial body.
I'm the federal co-chair. There is a provincial co-chair as well, although that position is in the position of being filled. The previous incumbent left his position, and he's being replaced by another provincial representative.
Every jurisdiction in the country is represented on the CMC, both provinces and the territories.
The Consumer Measures Committee, or CMC, was established under the 1995 Agreement on Internal Trade, in order to facilitate the process for reconciliation of consumer-related measures and standards, and to provide a forum for discussion among the jurisdictions on issues related to such measures and standards. Since its inception, CMC has been active in examining a variety of different issues that are of concern to Canadian consumers.
Depending on the issue at hand, CMC has conducted in-depth policy research and analysis, developed consumer education initiatives, or agreed to the harmonization of legislative measures. For some issues we've done all three.
All our efforts are carried out with a view to protecting consumers and informing them so they can better protect themselves. Consultation with stakeholders and the public is an integral part of our work.
I might add that CMC serves as a very useful informal network for officials to share information on new issues that are arising and on new initiatives individual jurisdictions may be undertaking or may have heard about.
Identity theft is one of the issues on CMC's plate. It is a particularly appropriate issue for our forum, given that it is an issue that cuts across borders, and touches upon the responsibilities of a very diverse set of government authorities. At the same time, I should note that there are many facets of the issue that fall outside of the various CMC members' mandates, such as the criminal aspects of identity theft.
In 2003 CMC struck a working group of federal and provincial officials to examine options for improving the situation for consumers in regard to identity theft. That working group is co-chaired by a representative of the federal government, Mr. Clarke, who is with me today, and an official from Ontario's Ministry of Government Services. The focus of the work so far has been two-pronged, based on one hand on public information and education and on the other hand on examining policy options to improve the consumer protection landscape for Canadians.
I would like to deal with each of these in turn.
First of all, in regard to consumer information and education, CMC's efforts stem in large part from the concerns expressed by ministers responsible for consumer affairs at their meeting in January 2004 in Winnipeg, where--and here I'm citing from the communiqué from that meeting--“Ministers recognized the serious concern that identity theft poses for consumers, leaving victims with a poor credit rating, ruined reputation and money losses.” The ministers agreed, as a first step, to harmonize information efforts to bring consumers the most reliable and complete information on how to reduce the risk of being victimized.
Since then, CMC has been very actively engaged in efforts to inform the public, both consumers and business, about how to prevent ID theft and what to do if it occurs. First of all, CMC developed the identity theft kit for consumers; it can be found on CMC's own website, at cmcweb.ca. It can also be found on the Canadian Consumer Information Gateway, at consumerinformation.ca, and I might add that the gateway is a portal, providing consumers with access to information from federal, provincial, and territorial governments and from a variety of respected consumer non-governmental organizations.
The kit includes information to help consumers reduce the risk of identity theft, assess whether they have become a victim, and advises them on what to do if they do fall victim.
It is essentially a set of forms that ID theft victims may use to help organize the information they need, so that they can more easily deal with financial institutions, credit card issuers, the police and other officials in repairing the damage done.
The ID theft kit for consumers was developed in a process of extensive consultation among and within the relevant federal, provincial, and territorial government departments, with businesses and financial institutions and with consumer organizations. As a companion piece to the consumer kit, a one-page checklist--which I have here--was produced to summarize key information for consumers.
In addition, a number of CMC members expressed the view that it would be useful to develop a document that would be destined for businesses. The result was the business identity theft kit, released in 2004, which includes sections on how to reduce the risk of compromising consumers' information, what to do when a thief strikes, and how to tell consumers about a breach. That document is also on the left-hand side of your folder.
The business kit, again, was developed by CMC in consultation with businesses and consumers. It, too, is available on the web at the two addresses I mentioned as well, at www.cmcweb.ca and consumerinformation.ca.
I hasten to add that CMC takes advantage of opportunities to distribute its educational products when and where it can. We always participate in fraud prevention month, for instance. This year we sent copies of the checklist--that's the blue document--to police groups throughout the country that deal with fraud and speak to public groups and so forth. We received a tremendous response to that initiative from police services, who asked for more material, which we supplied.
Identity theft continues to be a priority consumer issue for us. A section on identity theft has been included in the latest CMC consumer awareness projects targeted at seniors and youth. In addition, consumerinformation.ca currently has identity theft on its front page “Focus on...”, so that consumers, as soon as they hit the first page of the site, have their attention drawn to that particular item. In some cases, individual governments have also adapted the materials we've prepared to suit their own needs.
That's an overview of some of the information efforts we've taken to let consumers know about identity theft.
In regard to policy research and analysis, as you may be aware, CMC carried out a consultation on identity theft in 2005. That paper is available on our website at www.cmcweb.ca.
And I understand the clerk circulated a copy of that consultation document to you earlier on.
This was an effort that carried over into 2006, with follow-up discussions with some stakeholders. The consultation posed a number of questions in regard to possible measures to improve consumer protection.
These included some matters related to how businesses, financial institutions, consumer reporting agencies, and others handle or should be required to handle consumers' personal information in a way that would reduce the risk of identity theft and how to help when consumers become victims. CMC reviewed and analysed the issues raised in the consultation and took the opportunity to discuss them all, based upon the responses received and upon the various jurisdictions' specific concerns, mandates, and individual priorities.
Three major areas of focus for CMC discussion following the consultation were, first, a requirement that consumer reporting agencies implement security alerts on credit files when consumers request them. The effect of such a measure would be to ensure that those organizations that use credit reports--lenders, landlords, retailers--will see the fraud alerts on the consumers' report and take responsible steps to verify the identity of the person seeking the credit or service. Provinces saw this as an important issue, and we've already seen Ontario and Manitoba move forward with measures in this regard.
The second item was a requirement that consumer reporting agencies freeze consumer files at the request of consumers who have been the victims of identity theft. While this was a concept that interested jurisdictions, we heard a great deal of concern from business stakeholders about the potential effect such measures could have on consumers' access to credit when they need it. The technical feasibility of the implementation of credit freezes was raised by the industries as a concern as well. CMC determined, as a consequence, that it would not be appropriate to move forward with credit freezes at this time.
The final major issue in the consultation was mandatory notification of consumers in instances of security breaches within organizations. This was also an issue that prompted considerable discussion among CMC members, and interest, but given that the PIPEDA review was taking place, it was ultimately felt that CMC was not the appropriate forum at this stage for moving forward with recommendations for legislative change. Individual jurisdictions agreed to make any views they might have on the matter known to your committee during the review, and I understand at least one jurisdiction has written to the committee in regard to its views in that regard.
With regard to some more technical issues touching on the consumer reporting industry, which include credit reporting, it was felt that it would be better to deal with those in the context of a separate consultation focused exclusively on the laws governing that sector. These issues include what information may be included on a consumer's file and for how long, as well as the procedures for addressing consumers' concerns about the, and the document is being prepared for public distribution right now.
For now, let me note that CMC continues to be engaged on this issue. As I noted, identity theft is a matter that cuts across borders and engages the responsibility of many actors, in both the public and private sectors.
Coordination among and within governments is a challenge, one that CMC recognizes, but which we will continue to address.
On behalf of all members of the federal, provincial and territorial Consumer Measures Committee, I would like to thank you again for this opportunity to appear before the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics. I would be glad to answer your questions.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
9:10 a.m.
David Clarke Co-Chair, Identity Theft Working Group, Consumer Measures Committee, Department of Industry
No. I defer to Mr. Jenkin.
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Tom Wappel
Very good. Thank you.
All right. We'll start our list. Does anyone from the Liberals wish to ask any questions in the first round?
Yes, Mr. Peterson, go ahead.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
Jim Peterson Liberal Willowdale, ON
Thank you very much for being here.
The Privacy Commissioner appeared two days ago, and maybe I could just take you through some of the things she said.
Everyone is interested in identity theft, but no one is responsible for doing anything about it. Do you agree with that statement?
9:15 a.m.
Co-Chair, Consumer Measures Committee, Department of Industry
Certainly federal-provincial ministers have indicated some concern to take some leadership on the public information aspects of this issue. And in our own federal-provincial committee, as I think you've seen, we've certainly taken some leadership there.
It is fair to say as well, though, that this is a complicated issue. The definition of identity theft in fact is not entirely clear all the time. Quite a wide range of issues can be involved. There are certainly a wide number of players involved: both levels of government, the private sector, public advocacy organizations, and organizations such as the privacy commissioners themselves who report to Parliament. So I think it's fair to say, yes, that it is a complex set of issues and there are a lot of actors to coordinate.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
Jim Peterson Liberal Willowdale, ON
You've shown that you can cooperate, federally and provincially, through your committee.
She also called for stronger legal sanctions against those who engage in identity theft. Would you agree with that?
9:15 a.m.
Co-Chair, Consumer Measures Committee, Department of Industry
Well, I'm here speaking as an official of a federal-provincial committee to explain what we've done. I'm not really here to give an opinion on what the government should be doing one way or the other.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
Jim Peterson Liberal Willowdale, ON
Why not? You know a lot about it. Why aren't you prepared to share that information and advice with us? We're looking for help.
9:15 a.m.
Co-Chair, Consumer Measures Committee, Department of Industry
I can certainly explain to you what we've seen. I can explain to you what we understand of the severity of the problem, the character of the problem. It's not my place as an official to give an opinion about whether government should take action or not.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
Jim Peterson Liberal Willowdale, ON
Great.
She said that Canada is the only G-8 country without anti-spam legislation. Have you looked at the spam issue?
9:15 a.m.
Co-Chair, Consumer Measures Committee, Department of Industry
No, CMC has not, as an organization, looked at the spam issue.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
Jim Peterson Liberal Willowdale, ON
So you have no opinion on that.
She has called for the creation of a federal-provincial task force to look into identity theft on an urgent basis. Would that conflict with any of the work you're doing, or would you have input into that? Would that federal-provincial task force be encroaching on work you're doing, Mr. Jenkin or Mr. Clarke?
9:15 a.m.
Co-Chair, Consumer Measures Committee, Department of Industry
I think we've certainly done some good preliminary work in this area. I'm not entirely certain what the Privacy Commissioner was referring to in terms of the federal-provincial group, what area of activity it would cover. As a collective group, we don't generally deal with justice and criminal matters. Although several of our members come from attorney general departments, as a group we don't deal exclusively and generally with Criminal Code questions. So if she's talking about dealing with legal matters in that sense—
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
Jim Peterson Liberal Willowdale, ON
She says:
Government has an important leadership role to play by developing a strategy to fight identity theft, by co-coordinating the efforts of different stakeholders and by creating a legal framework that gives law enforcement agencies the tools they need to fight identity theft and gives individuals the ability to seek redress when they are harmed. One way that government can show leadership is by creating a federal-provincial task force.
9:15 a.m.
Co-Chair, Consumer Measures Committee, Department of Industry
If governments decided to do that, we could certainly collaborate with them and provide them with the benefit of the work we've done, and I'm sure we could be of some considerable help to such a group.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
Jim Peterson Liberal Willowdale, ON
Have you any comments on the fact that the United States created such a task force a couple of years ago and has put a great deal of emphasis on it, whereas repeated calls for creating this task force in Canada have come to naught?
9:15 a.m.
Co-Chair, Consumer Measures Committee, Department of Industry
We've certainly looked at some of the work the Americans have done.
David?
9:15 a.m.
Co-Chair, Identity Theft Working Group, Consumer Measures Committee, Department of Industry
All I can say, really, is that, yes, we have looked at what the U.S. has done, but within CMC and within my identity theft working group, we're working within the powers of the individual jurisdictions, which are limited. They extend to consumer protection laws, mainly at the provincial level—for instance, credit reporting laws. These are the kinds of issues we've been looking at. They don't extend as widely as perhaps that U.S. group does.
9:20 a.m.
Co-Chair, Consumer Measures Committee, Department of Industry
I would just add, perhaps, that one of the issues you deal with when you're dealing with federal-provincial collaboration in this area is that not all of the consumer protection agencies across the country necessarily share the same legislative base, nor are they in the same departments and organizations. Some, for example, are in government services departments. Some of them are in departments of the attorney general. One of them is in the ministry of finance of the provincial government.
So when you're talking about doing collective action, you have to face the reality that you have members who are ministers when they meet, working together, who come from different organizational structures. They don't necessarily all have the same legislative base. While they certainly have all the same constitutional jurisdictions—provinces certainly have the same constitutional powers—the ministers that may be responsible for consumer affairs don't necessarily all have the same legislative mandates to deal with all of the same issues in the same way.
9:20 a.m.
Liberal
Jim Peterson Liberal Willowdale, ON
Surely different governments can bring a whole-of-government approach to this thing, rather than operating in little silos.
9:20 a.m.
Co-Chair, Consumer Measures Committee, Department of Industry
They can, but it often requires bringing more than one minister from a jurisdiction to a table when you're dealing with an issue as complex as identity theft. You're covering civil law and criminal law. You're dealing with issues involving the coordination of police forces and law enforcement agencies. There are also public education issues, and so forth. So quite a wide spectrum of issues has to be dealt with here and brought together to create a comprehensive strategy.
9:20 a.m.
Liberal
Jim Peterson Liberal Willowdale, ON
It seems to me you're saying that we had better get our act together, and maybe a task force is needed on an urgent basis to bring all these threads into one strand.
9:20 a.m.
Co-Chair, Consumer Measures Committee, Department of Industry
I've outlined for you some of the challenges we face as officials dealing with this issue.