No. Mr. Chairman, that is correct. The honourable member has exactly stated what our position is. We raise it, but our preference is that we leave PIPEDA as it is. I believe this issue was looked at in 2000. It is a flexible definition. In some of the decisions made by the Privacy Commissioner we have dealt with the issue of work product and decided that in very obvious situations it is not covered by the act, but in situations where the information is of a more personal type, more of a revealing type, the act could cover it. This is an important issue for many people. I'm concerned, Mr. Chairman, that if we go to a definition, as we go on and increasingly it's easy for employers to set up video cameras and monitor their employees in all kinds of ways, this definition will hamper our attempts to minimize workplace surveillance and to limit that kind of surveillance to what is necessary. So I think for the moment the status quo is reasonably satisfactory.
On November 27th, 2006. See this statement in context.