Evidence of meeting #39 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was requests.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
We haven't started it yet, actually; you haven't said anything.
I just want to remind members that a point of order is not what you use when you want the floor because somebody else has it.
5:15 p.m.
Some hon. members
Hear, hear.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
There must be a direct point of order that—and I'm going to read this—calls “attention to the departure from the Standing Orders or from the customary manner in which a committee has conducted its proceedings”. That is from Marleau and Montpetit, page 857. I don't want to establish a precedent wherein people just want to interrupt the proceedings with points of order.
Mr. Murphy, you have asked for a point of order. Please state the nature of the point of order before you get into debating it.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Brian Murphy Liberal Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
There are two items on the agenda. You're not getting to the second one. Why?
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
That's a question. That is not a point of order.
I'm going to Mr. Hiebert, for five minutes, please.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This is my first opportunity to ask a question....
I'm sorry. You probably can't hear me; there are too many people talking.
This is my first opportunity to ask a question, and I want to start by thanking the witnesses for being here today.
I want to begin by asking you this, Mr. McCowan. You mentioned that you've been with Corrections Canada for two years now, and in your opening remarks you stated that you're the assistant commissioner for policy and research. How is that related to the privacy side of Correction Services?
5:15 p.m.
Assistant Commissioner, Policy and Research, Correctional Service Canada
The policy and research sector has a number of different components. One of the components is the access to information and privacy division. It's just a question of how the organization organizes itself. In other government departments, the ATIP division turns up in different areas. Within Corrections Canada, the logical fit for us was within the policy and research group.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
So have you been in an oversight position?
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
All right. That helps me understand things a bit better.
I'm not sure who mentioned—actually, I think it was Ms. Rooke who stated it—that in the past year you have done two privacy impact assessments. Why? What motivation was there to do these assessments? Currently under the Privacy Act it is not required; this is one of the things the Privacy Commissioner is requesting. In fact, she wants all government departments to do this—this is recommendation number 3. I know that Treasury Board has talked about something similar, but I wasn't aware that it was actually required of all departments.
Do you have legislation or regulations that cause you to do these impact assessments, or are you simply doing them from your own sense of responsibility or due diligence? What would be the motivation behind these?
5:20 p.m.
Director, Access to Information and Privacy, Correctional Service Canada
It's Treasury Board policy. We are required to do privacy impact assessments when we start a new program that involves the collection, use, or disclosure of personal information.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
Okay.
Are those privacy impact assessments the same in nature as what has been proposed by the Privacy Commissioner, or are they different?
What she's asking for is a PIA, a privacy impact assessment. What you're telling me is that Treasury Board currently requires a privacy impact assessment as a matter of policy. Is she asking for something that's already in place, or do you know if there's a difference between what she has proposed and what Treasury Board guidelines require?
5:20 p.m.
Director, Access to Information and Privacy, Correctional Service Canada
I'm afraid I don't.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
5:20 p.m.
Assistant Commissioner, Policy and Research, Correctional Service Canada
I'm sorry, I'm not in a position to assist. I don't know the background of that particular recommendation.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
Do you know if this requirement from Treasury Board has some of the other things that she's asking for, such as a necessity test? Does Treasury Board require a necessity test in terms of determining which information you must review or assess in your privacy impact assessments?
5:20 p.m.
Assistant Commissioner, Policy and Research, Correctional Service Canada
The necessity test, perhaps, Ms. Rooke--
5:20 p.m.
Director, Access to Information and Privacy, Correctional Service Canada
It's not set out as such. What I do know is that Treasury Board is currently, in fact, revisiting all of the ATIP policies, including the PIA policy, and they are developing a new one that will come into effect on April 1, 2009. Whether that will reflect some of the comments of the Privacy Commissioner, I don't know.
5:20 p.m.
Assistant Commissioner, Policy and Research, Correctional Service Canada
In terms of the necessity test, as I understand it, the first recommendation was to create a legislative necessity test that required government institutions to demonstrate the need for the personal information they collect.
We're in a slightly different boat, because we had the section in our statute that I read to you, and that basically outlines what we need to gather in relation to offenders. At least in terms of that portion of our information-gathering exercise, we have been given a code.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
All right.
Your code has information or a requirement for a necessity test?
5:20 p.m.
Assistant Commissioner, Policy and Research, Correctional Service Canada
No, it's not so much framed as a necessity test. It's just that vis-à-vis offenders, we're told which things we have to gather. Parliament has given us a code of what we need to gather.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
So it's in fact a necessity test. You don't have to justify it, because it's there as a requirement.
5:20 p.m.
Assistant Commissioner, Policy and Research, Correctional Service Canada
Parliament has told us what's necessary.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
Okay.
Has Parliament also told you whether or not these inmates have a right to appeal? That's another thing the Privacy Commissioner is asking about.
The reason I'm asking these questions is that if this is already happening in your department, then perhaps it's not necessary for.... Is there a right of appeal?