Evidence of meeting #29 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was budget.
A video is available from Parliament.
5 p.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pat Martin
Could we stop the clock for a second?
In the interest of saving the Conservatives the trouble of challenging the chair again, I'm going to ask you to be a little more creative in phrasing your questions to tie them, at least indirectly, to the estimates, or at the very least the budget of the Office of the Privacy Commissioner.
5 p.m.
Liberal
Arnold Chan Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
Sure, that's fair enough.
I'm going to pivot to a completely different topic or different area. This is a complaint that's come up from the public, including from journalists and others who have gone through the process of doing ATIP requests. The Privy Council Office has often been focused on providing that information in paper format only, as opposed to a soft-copy, machine-readable format, which of course makes it much more difficult to really sift through a particularly large volume of information.
Given your current resources, are you aware of this particular problem, and how would you respond to such an approach by the Privy Council Office?
5 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
What I would say is that there may be advantages and disadvantages to receiving information in paper form. One advantage might be to ensure the security of the information in question, which certainly is possible to manage if it is received in paper form. That's the point that comes to mind.
But we'll get back to you on your question.
5 p.m.
Liberal
Arnold Chan Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
Okay.
The reason I raise this issue is that we were told by the Privy Council Office that to ensure the integrity of the information, they do not give out digital versions of parliamentary returns. In practice, what this means is that the users of the information have to reconstruct the entire data set and create it in digital form so that we can ultimately search it. That can often introduce transcription errors or other difficulties in accessing information that was not provided originally in digital format.
It sounds as if you view that as a reasonable, valid position to adopt, given the concerns about the integrity of that information.
5 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
It is an issue that would be a factor in coming up with a position on whether that ultimately is reasonable or not. I would certainly bear that factor in mind in assessing the situation.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Arnold Chan Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
For example, would it be relevant to the recent request that's come to your office from the CRA and the recent accidental release of the tax records of certain individuals who had claimed certain deductions with respect to art work?
5:05 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Breaches can occur with paper records or digital records. They're perhaps more likely to occur with digital records.
It would be a consideration.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pat Martin
Thank you, Mr. Chan. That concludes your seven minutes.
Next, for the Conservatives, we have Mr. Bob Zimmer.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Bob Zimmer Conservative Prince George—Peace River, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Therrien, for appearing before our committee today. I certainly don't admire your job in the environment we have today; it's definitely a challenging one. I guess you don't have to wake up and wonder what you're going to do for the day.
We definitely see it on the Hill as well. We want to be accessible to the public, but we are also balanced out with the fact that we have bad people who want to do bad things. It's a balancing act; it's a tough one, to say the least. And to be the people who have to be security, or as you are, the Privacy Commissioner.... It's definitely a challenging environment, to say the least.
I see it being two groups. I just pulled up a CBC article on my laptop, and it said you have just been hacked by the Syrian army. That shows that it affects a lot of us in our daily reading. And it's really everybody. It affects not just people who read the daily news in their homes, but it also affects us as MPs.
Do you have the resources to address these new challenges that you face? I think it said in your report that it presents its challenges, but that there are also good things that can come out of those challenges.
Could you just speak to the resources that you have, seeing that we're here for the estimates? Do you have enough to address this new thing we're seeing?
5:05 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
First on the question of security and privacy, I'll just say that ultimately I think it's possible to have both, and that position informs quite a few comments that I have made, whether it's about Bill C-13 or Bill C-44. I think security is obviously very important, and legislators should act to protect the public, but it is possible to have both security and privacy and not one at the cost of the other.
As to the question of my overall resources, if I understand correctly, and whether there are enough resources to do the job, with all the tasks, obviously there are important work pressures that we're facing. My starting point on the question of whether we have sufficient resources is, of course, that I will try very much to achieve our mandate within the budgets allocated to Parliament because, of course, these moneys come from taxpayers and I want very much to be able to achieve our goals within these budgets.
That being said, there are important work pressures, and I'll just name a few. First of all, the number of complaints that are made under the Privacy Act and PIPEDA is growing continually. The government has an ambitious policy agenda, which means that we're called upon to comment on legislation, but also we're called upon to make comments to departments on the proposed procedures and policies. The rapid evolution of technologies in the private sector also, of course, creates privacy risks that we have to react to. As I've indicated to your colleague, it's important to ensure that individuals are able to exercise control over their information, which implies that we have an important public education role that is part of our role. So these are the work pressures.
At this point, I would say that I'm still assessing, frankly, whether we have enough to achieve all of these objectives, but I will try as much as possible to do that. In part, what is at play, given the work pressures, is that we have to be constantly looking for new and efficient methods to do our work. This is something that the OPC has done over the years, and we're still very much in that mode. For instance, investigations, which constitute roughly 50% of our work, are the subject of more efficient processes, for instance, that use early resolution as opposed to a full-fledged investigation into complaints. We're trying to have more efficient methods, and this is working. Productivity is up, there are more files being closed in the office than ever before, but unfortunately, the growth in complaints exceeds the growth in our productivity. That's an issue we have to tackle.
In particular, the number of complaints made under the Privacy Act is growing. Our response times to these complaints is also growing because of the phenomenon I was describing: the growth in complaints exceeds the growth in productivity. In early 2015, we will launch an audit into the activities of that branch to see whether it could be possible to be even more efficient than we are currently.
Essentially, there are important work pressures. My objective is to work within the budget that was given to me. At this point I'm not asking for additional moneys. If I come to a different view, I will let you know.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Bob Zimmer Conservative Prince George—Peace River, BC
Just on behalf of our side, and likely all of us here, necessity is the mother of invention, and I think you've done well with what you have. Thanks for doing what you do. We appreciate it.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pat Martin
Thank you very much, Mr. Zimmer.
Thank you, Mr. Therrien.
We are switching to five-minute rounds now, so please again keep your questions and answers concise.
Next, for the NDP, we have Mr. Mathieu Ravignat.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Mathieu Ravignat NDP Pontiac, QC
Mr. Therrien, thank you for being here.
I have a simple question. On the Bill C-44 study in committee, did you request to appear in front of committee?
5:10 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
We asked to appear, yes.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Mathieu Ravignat NDP Pontiac, QC
Were you the main drafter of regulations post-2011 with regard to the sharing of information across borders?
5:10 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Yes.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Mathieu Ravignat NDP Pontiac, QC
So you're uniquely placed to understand security issues with regard to sharing information. I find it particularly ridiculous and unacceptable that you couldn't appear in front of the a committee discussing these very issues. You are, sir, the expert in this country on these issues and yet we did not allow you to appear in front of committee.
Now I'm going to tie this, because my Conservative colleagues are no doubt getting hot under the collar, to the budget. The reality is that if certain pieces of legislation are fundamentally unconstitutional that creates an incredible burden on your office. Was this part of your worries with regard to Bill C-34 and Bill C-13?
5:10 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Ultimately my concern with respect to Bill C-13 is that although the Supreme Court decision in Spencer clarified many things, it could not and did not clarify every issue raised by this bill. My concern is that the Canadian population will be in the dark as to the level of protection of the information that they put on the Internet.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Mathieu Ravignat NDP Pontiac, QC
Do you fear that when this legislation gets rammed through by the Conservatives in the House you are actually going to not have the resources to deal with these pieces of legislation?
5:10 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
My statutory duties in this regard would be in part on the question of sharing by organization subject to PIPEDA and whether their sharing conforms to the Spencer decision. There could be complaints along those lines.
It would be premature to prejudge whether we'll be able to assess the workload or not.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Mathieu Ravignat NDP Pontiac, QC
Thank you for that.
The Information Commissioner has come out saying basically that she is strangled and she can't do her job because she doesn't have enough money.
You are being a little bit more generous with your comments, but clearly there is a significant increase in the amount of workload you have. There has been very little increase in your budget. How can Canadians be confident that you have the resources necessary to do your job?
5:15 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
At this point, as I have said, we have increased our productivity with respect to complaints in relation to PIPEDA. Our productivity is up and the response time is down and the backlog has been reduced. I think we're going in the right direction. We have some challenges with respect to Privacy Act investigations.
November 27th, 2014 / 5:15 p.m.
NDP
Mathieu Ravignat NDP Pontiac, QC
There is no doubt, sir, that you are doing a great job with the money you have. My question is that perhaps you are doing what any good civil servant at your level would do, you deal with the budget you have but that doesn't mean you have enough. That doesn't mean you couldn't have more, particularly in a changing climate.
Privacy in this country and in the world has fundamentally changed in its nature and there needs to be proper government investment with regard to the future.
Anyway, that's a comment.
What I find kind of funny in this climate too is that we actually rip $125,000 from your budget to go and give it to the CRTC to deal with spam mail. Why did we take that from your budget? Can you explain why we took that from your budget to give it to the CRTC instead of raising the CRTC's budget to deal with the issue?
5:15 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
It is actually at our request that this is being done.