Thank you, Mr. Chair.
If you look at the current clause 47, it says:
The Minister may disclose to a person or government, without the consent of the person to whom the information relates, any personal information or confidential business information if the Minister considers that the disclosure is necessary
And then it goes on to prescribe circumstances in which they think it may be necessary to apply this section.
It goes on to define what government means, but, interestingly, there's nothing in the legislation with respect to the confidentiality and the maintenance of that confidentiality following the disclosure.
We will all recall that Ms. Karen Proud was here on behalf of the Retail Council of Canada, representing I can't recall how many dozens of members. Other witnesses before the committee also expressed a vigorous concern about (a) the person or people to whom the information would be disclosed, and (b) the need to maintain a certain degree of confidence.
No one is suggesting that the minister or anyone from the CFIA or anyone investigating a violation should be limited in the vigour with which they might pursue their investigation. Who knows where evidence may be found in respect of a violation? To the common person, it appears to be on the floor or dripping from the ceilings, as in the case of XL, but either a failure to act or indeed some act that was undertaken by the prospective offender could be disclosed in written material.
When going through all this material, depending on who's going through it and what's disclosed, they might find information that's completely irrelevant to their investigation and yet could nevertheless be disclosed: confidential information, information about a particular business practice that might be a secret that they would want kept from their competitors. That was understood by all of us, and any one of us in business understands the merit of the concern.
The amendment I have proposed in subclause 47(1), and I'll only read the first part because I think it makes the point as to the intent of the balance of the amendment, is that:
The Minister may disclose any personal information or confidential business information to a person or government, without the consent of the person to whom the information relates and without notifying that person,
—provided, and this is where I think the operative words are—
if the person to whom or government to which the information may be disclosed agrees in writing to maintain the confidentiality of the information and to use it only for the purpose of carrying out functions related to the protection of human health or safety or the environment and if the Minister considers that
to be the case.
Mr. Chair, I'm not going to spend a lot of time. I think it's self-explanatory. We're merely trying to address the concerns of stakeholders who came before this committee, who didn't have the benefit, I don't think, of asking you questions at committee because you weren't here, but certainly compelled a number of us to be concerned and to bring forward this amendment so they would be protected should confidential information be disclosed.