Evidence of meeting #29 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 complaints.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
This is my last question. Presumably you have some in-house counsel, some outsourcing, and some legal services somewhere in your paperwork. You have three sources, do you?
4:25 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
For legal services, we hire our own counsel. We're not linked to Justice, as other agencies are. We have our own. Currently we have nine lawyers. Exceptionally, we contract outside counsel.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
How much do the inside and outside counsel cost this year compared to last year?
4:25 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
It seems it's about $300,000 for outside counsel, Mr. Chairman.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
Would that be for this past year versus the year before?
4:25 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
That is the projection for this year, but my chief financial officer tells me it's been very consistent year to year.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Thank you, Mr. Tilson.
Before we go on, I'm looking at the pie chart of departures by reason. The total for 2007-08 is 51 persons, only five of whom left due to retirement. That doesn't square, I guess, with the impression I got that throughout the public service we're looking at a 25% to 40% retirement rate because of baby boomers and stuff like that.
Fifty-one people represents an enormous percentage of your human resources complement, and I would think any organization couldn't possibly be productive and functional to the levels that should be expected. This looks like an issue that we would like to spend a little more time on. We can study other departments, but I have a feeling maybe we should look at our own backyard first. I do know that we have similar issues in the access area as well.
We know about the human resources, but now let's look at the other side, the productivity of the Privacy Commission. How do you define backlog?
4:25 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Backlog is currently defined as unassigned cases.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
4:25 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
That's right.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
So if everybody were busy and you had a normal complement and there was nothing in the hopper, then you would say you have no backlog?
4:25 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Yes, and in fact many investigators have far too many cases to be very efficient with them, but we assign them, because then possibly they can contact the person and try to help them over the phone and so on.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Is there another way to define backlog that might be a little more appropriate or telling about how well we're serving the purpose for which the commission exists?
For instance, you say if they're not in the hopper and they haven't been assigned, and there are also a bunch of people who have too many files, things are not getting done. Obviously the throughput or the disposition of files is not coming out, and the backlog that is being represented really isn't a true backlog.
How bad is it?
4:30 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
There are many ways to define this.
In terms of complaints that are unassigned, under the Privacy Act there are 368 now, and under PIPEDA there are 49. As you suggested, Mr. Chairman, there are many ways--and I think some of you are accountants, so you know--that we can divide the definitions of our complaint process. We juggle with those and attempt to see how we can do our job most efficiently with existing resources and within the requirements of the act, given that we cannot, as I've explained, under either act quickly say, “We're not going to deal with that”.
4:30 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Yes, we do.
4:30 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
We are not doing as well as we might hope. Under the Privacy Act, there are different kinds of service standards. In general, treatment times should be 10 months. We are now at 14.4 months for a Privacy Act complaint. Under PIPEDA, the law says we are supposed to investigate complaints within a year. My latest information says we're taking an average of 16.5 months.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
I think everybody understands where we are. We all need to think a little more, and I believe we're going to look for an opportunity. I'm sure the committee will want to look for an opportunity. This is not just you, not just the Privacy Commissioner. I understand that. There is a cultural issue here. We're part of it, and we want to work together. I hope we will be able to play a role in having a plan on the table, a viable plan with realistic service-level targets and achievement standards.
People should be rewarded for meeting those targets. And when we have other circumstances, we can make changes. However, we can deal with that. We're not going to resolve it right now. But I think it's helpful to understand, both operationally and from the estimates perspective.
Are there any final burning questions?
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
I have a comment on the estimates. I appreciate your coming today. Since some of my colleagues on the other side aren't that excited about estimates, I think it was important that we highlighted some of the problems you've indicated.
My issue with estimates was highlighted again today. What's not approved yet doesn't show up. The plan is not accounted for, and they have a three-year plan. I don't know how to make the change, but we should be having organizations or departments let us know their plans. This way we could have a proper discussion about it. At the end of the day, somebody else is going to decide, not this committee. It's going to come back as a supplementary (A) or a supplementary (B). It's going to be a fait accompli.
If I gave this to my neighbour, it would look like they have 150 people for the next three years and they're not raising it. From a layman's point of view, their increase doesn't even cover the cost of an inflationary-rate increase in salary.
I think it's important for us to be doing these estimates pieces. I'm glad we've done them. I think it's highlighted a number of issues, and I appreciate the indulgence that my colleagues from the other side have given me to get some of these issues on the table.
Thank you.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
We're not going to suspend or anything. We're just going to carry on, but now let's put a little focus on the other aspect that we wanted to discuss with you and your people.
4:30 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Could we have a change of guard, Mr. Chair?
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
We can. Why don't you do that.
We're now moving toward a dialogue with the commissioner with regard to the Privacy Act itself. The committee has had some discussions about making some good use of our time, but because the House doesn't sit for three months, it really is not our first choice to start something, leave it alone, and come back three months later. It's just not a very productive approach.
We thought what we would do, as you know, is look at an assessment of the current Privacy Act and make some informed decisions as to where we might be able to do some work--within the time available until the summer break--to make some recommendations.
I understand that in that context you have some further opening statements on that. Why don't you introduce your colleagues who are with you and commence with your statement, and then we'll see where we go from there.
4:35 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
I could go right to the suggestions, Mr. Chair, if that would be more useful.