Mr. Chairman, thank you.
I'd like to continue on this topic of outsourcing. I don't know whether you've had a chance to look at the recommendations, but outsourcing may be partially dealt with in recommendation 10.
There's a paragraph in the booklet that the commissioner provided to us that I find startling. It's on page 29:
However, the Privacy Act does not reflect this increase in international information sharing. The Privacy Act places only two restrictions on disclosures to foreign governments: an agreement or arrangement must exist; and the personal information must be used for administering or enforcing a law or conducting an investigation. The Privacy Act does not even require that the agreement or arrangement be in writing. The Privacy Act does not impose any duty on the disclosing institution to identify the precise purpose for which the data will be disclosed and limit its subsequent use by the foreign government to that purpose, limit the amount of personal information disclosed and restrict further disclosure to third parties. Moreover, the Privacy Act even fails to impose any basic obligations on the Canadian government institution itself to adequately safeguard personal information.
I just find that an incredible statement. The recommendation simply says that we strengthen the provisions governing the disclosure of personal information.
I'd like to know how to deal with this.
There was a book that I read, and I can't remember the name of it, but I think it was called The World Is Flat, by somebody called Friedman, which also scared the heck out of me. It dealt with the very things Mr. Pearson was talking about.
So then you start asking about what a government can abuse. They can abuse all kinds of things. They can abuse outsourcing. We don't even know what could be done. There's income tax. It could go on and on—police abuse, security abuse, and no-fly lists. People are gradually getting very concerned about this, because all of a sudden they try to get on a plane and they can't get on a plane.
So in regard to recommendation 10—and I don't know whether you have looked at it or not—how can we make the public feel better about all of these things? The wording that's on that page, or the two pages for recommendation 10, I don't think the average person in this country would really feel very confident about, with its general phrase, well, let's strengthen the provisions.
How are we going to deal with all of these things?