Evidence of meeting #36 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 recommendations.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
In the second round we have Mr. Pearson, Mr. Tilson, Madame Lavallée, and Mr. Martin.
Mr. Pearson, please.
May 27th, 2008 / 4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Glen Pearson Liberal London North Centre, ON
Minister, it's nice to see you today, and the others.
The Privacy Commissioner would like to see a necessity test in the legislation that would require the government to demonstrate the need for the personal information they collect. I just wonder if you have any thoughts on that.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
Individual departments do that right now. I don't know if my officials have any comments on that, but it's my understanding that they analyze it. As I pointed out in my opening comments, a number of departments have a higher threshold than the Privacy Act. I gave you the examples of the Income Tax Act and the Statistics Act, and that makes sense.
So there is a certain amount of flexibility, but each department is required to make sure they are up-to-date and meet those tests. I think that's being done.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Glen Pearson Liberal London North Centre, ON
In your view, do government institutions collect more information than they actually require?
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
They're careful in their privacy considerations. I gave the example of the Income Tax Act, in terms of protecting. I pointed out some of the mechanics of that--these individuals take oaths to protect that information. If they're found to be in violation of those oaths, they can be charged under the Criminal Code.
4:20 p.m.
Carolyn Kobernick Assistant Deputy Minister, Public Law Sector, Department of Justice
Of course, there's the Info Source publication that requires all departments to publish. Those banks of documents they have to collect and retain are available to everyone.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Glen Pearson Liberal London North Centre, ON
In your opening remarks you said Canada is a world leader in this. We've been at this for some time now. We've heard a number of witnesses say that the Privacy Act is pretty antiquated and we should look at some provincial or European models--use some of the links we have with those.
I'd be interested in your comments on that, because you seem to be saying we're doing pretty well with the Privacy Act--we're a world leader. But many of the witnesses have not felt that way.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
I'm surprised. For instance, did they go all the way through South America? Did they check how it's going in Ecuador and what it's like in China? If I go to the biggest countries, is Russia outpacing us? I'm just telling you that in my canvassing of all the world....
Usually people say to me that we're falling way behind. Well, the list is actually very short. I ask who they think we're not maintaining with. There may be countries, and you've mentioned western Europe, that have made changes, and you can say that theirs is a little better than the Canadian piece of legislation. It's certainly newer than the Canadian piece of legislation. But in the briefings I've had, and with the interest I've taken over the years, I'll tell you that the list is always very short.
People say Canada is falling behind. We're falling behind whom? I always say, give me a list of those countries you think we're falling behind. I think generally, and I say it not just with respect to privacy but with respect to other areas in the protection of human rights, you'll always find that Canada.... Somebody will say that the United Kingdom has.... Okay, I appreciate that. Or somebody says on another issue that Australia has this. Okay, but still, it's a short list.
That doesn't mean the legislation is perfect. I remember when it came in, I thought it was a breath of fresh air. This was a wonderful piece of legislation that was brought in about 25 years ago. But again, is it perfect? No. This is why I'm interested in what the Privacy Commissioner has to say, and I will be very interested in what you have to say, quite frankly, and in whatever recommendations you have.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Glen Pearson Liberal London North Centre, ON
Thank you.
As far as outsourcing goes, I've heard a number of witnesses who have come before us on that as well. They have concerns about it. There is the idea about written agreements.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Glen Pearson Liberal London North Centre, ON
There are written agreements with foreign countries. We have heard that we actually have written agreements on our part, but we don't always get them from others. I wonder if you have a view on that, because that was a concern for the committee.
4:20 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Public Law Sector, Department of Justice
Denis can perhaps speak to the issue of outsourcing.
4:20 p.m.
Director General, Counsel, Information Law and Privacy Section, Department of Justice
By outsourcing, you mean disclosure to third countries. The Privacy Act requirement right now is that we can do that under an agreement or an arrangement with another country if it's for law enforcement purposes. It doesn't specify what sort of agreement, what sort of arrangement, but there needs to be an agreement that is arrived at with that country. There is nothing more specific required now.
My own experience is that I've seen a lot of these written agreements. There might be some disclosures that happen without agreements.
4:20 p.m.
Director General, Counsel, Information Law and Privacy Section, Department of Justice
Yes, they are unwritten agreements. But that would not be what I see on a day-to-day basis.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Glen Pearson Liberal London North Centre, ON
Just quickly, Mr. Chair, the witnesses are saying that we actually need written agreements. Otherwise, we can't quite track what's going on.
4:20 p.m.
Director General, Counsel, Information Law and Privacy Section, Department of Justice
Well, as a lawyer, I always prefer written agreements. I don't like clients doing verbal agreements, so I would never suggest to a client that a verbal agreement is better than a written one.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
We'll have Mr. Tilson, please.
We can carry on with this when the minister.... I know the minister is going to have to excuse himself soon.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
There is a briefing note on this with respect to recommendation 10, which Mr. Pearson is referring to. The recommendation is that what we have now is pretty weak.
In all the comments you're making--that the agreement doesn't have to be in writing, that the Privacy Act doesn't impose any duties on the disclosing institution to identify the precise purpose for which this data will be disclosed, and so on.... Mr. Kratchanov, do you think we should have Mr. Day come to the committee and talk about that topic? Because although it's Minister Nicholson's jurisdiction, this is getting into arrangements with foreign states.
4:25 p.m.
Director General, Counsel, Information Law and Privacy Section, Department of Justice
Certainly I think that would be a good idea.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
Don't say I made the recommendation; just do what you want.