Information & Ethics Committee on May 27th, 2008

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Mr. Minister, one of the issues that has not been raised by the Privacy Commissioner was raised by—and I think most, if not all, of us members of the committee received a letter from them back in April—the National Association for Information Destruction. They talk about including a definition of information destruction.

You probably don't know too much about that, Minister, and maybe I'll look at someone else.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

I'm more concerned about information theft. That's the one we have under the identity label: people who are grabbing your information and then selling it to others.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

I understand that, and it's part of it. But this issue has been raised because of the story after story we heard during the PIPEDA hearings about information that was found in dumpsters in West Virginia and Winners and CIBC—I hate to mention them again. This letter refers to 800 to 900 personal medical files found in vacant buildings in Yorkton, Saskatchewan—some of these, of course, are more PIPEDA; sensitive personal information about children, found in garbage near a social housing project in Toronto; files containing personal tax and financial information of dozens of people, found in a dumpster in downtown Vancouver, etc.

So the question, which was raised with the PIPEDA hearings, is whether there should be a definition of information destruction, because the public want to be confident that this information is being properly destroyed.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

And the public has every right to expect that and want it. I can tell you, Mr. Tilson, that the treasury department has issued guidelines to departments on what is known as “breach notification”, if there is an inadvertent—or advertent, in the very rare case—release of information, on what to do and making sure it is remedied. It's a big problem, not just within the federal sphere.

I remember walking down the street in Niagara Falls, and somebody told me he was just checking over my report card. When they closed my high school, they left all the report cards, attendance records—they left everything for the last 60 years—and I guess it was just open season for anybody who wanted to go into the building to check on it.

I'm pleased that there are Treasury Board guidelines on this, because as you point out, it's a huge problem, or it can be, when it takes place. We hear every so often about sometimes millions of documents that somehow get released on a disc that was inadvertently placed somewhere. I think there are very strict guidelines in this country, but if you have any recommendations with respect to that, we'd be very interested.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

But again, a lot of the problem we have is the theft of information, not just the inappropriate disclosure. That's a major—

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Oh, I understand that.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

That's a major problem we have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Madame Lavallée.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

You said earlier, minister—and you were quite right—that you did not have too many priorities, because when there are too many priorities, there end up being no priorities. Is the review of the legislation we are studying at the moment one of your priorities?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Let's see what you have to say, Madame Lavallée. I'll be very interested to see what you have to say and whether it's possible. But I hesitate to make predictions. I have people, for instance, who about every third day tell me another justice priority that I should be bringing in legislation for. While I tell them I am very sympathetic or empathetic to what they have to say, I have to be somewhat realistic in terms of getting anything through the House of Commons. I don't want to say to you I'd be glad to introduce legislation at the end of June on your recommendations when in fact that may not be possible.

I've had an interest in this particular area, quite frankly, for quite some time, and I was a member of a committee that went coast to coast, as I told you, on the “in and out” report at that time. So I'm quite familiar with it, I'm interested in what you have to say, and I will take it from there.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

If I understand correctly, this may become one of your priorities. It will depend on the changes we ask you to make.

Did I understand you correctly?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

I'm not in a position to commit the government to making amendments. There is a process that all governments follow, but again, I'm very interested to hear what you have to say.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

If I understand correctly, this is not a priority. A little earlier, you were blowing both hot and cold. You say that this legislation has worked well over the last 25 years, that Canada was not so bad, that it was one of the top 20 countries in the world, and that, as a result, this legislation represented a good balance. Those are all the expressions you used.

Does that mean that the bill we are reviewing at the moment is not a priority for you, but that if we were to make some interesting suggestions, you might act on them?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

I suppose you could say I blow hot and cold on the Criminal Code as well, even though I believe the Criminal Code works fairly well in Canada. I believe we have a wonderful criminal justice system in this country. I believe there are lots of rights, a lot of protections, and a lot of constitutional guarantees, but you probably notice I'm involved all the time with making changes to the Criminal Code. I'd never want anybody to take that to say that Nicholson thinks the criminal justice system doesn't work in this country, or that it's a bad system or anything like that. Quite the contrary. Any time I talk about the criminal justice system in this country and its rights, I always say Canada is at the top. We do an excellent job.

Does that mean I won't be bringing in more legislation to change the Criminal Code? I promise you I will be making changes. Again, I'm not announcing anything. I would be very pleased to get the ones I have before Parliament through right now.

When people talk to me about the Privacy Act, I say have a look around the world and check out what the rest of the world is doing. Anybody who says others have a better regime for protecting privacy...that has to be a very short list. That doesn't mean that we cannot...indeed, we should continue to look at these pieces of legislation with a view to changing them, because that's how we do stay up to date, that's how we do stay at the top of any particular list that analyzes these issues. Again, without committing to amendments to this, because as I said to you, some of these don't need amendments to the act, some of them I think can be accomplished, and I gave an example to Mr. Martin.

Again, you go about your work and I'll be very interested to hear what you have to say.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Thank you very much, Madame Lavallée.

I understand Mr. Wallace has a brief intervention and I think Mr. Martin wanted to finish off. I'm sure the minister will accommodate us.

Mr. Wallace, one quick one.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

On recommendation 3, it's to enshrine in law the PIAs, the privacy impact assessments. I'm assuming your department uses this tool already. You indicated in your opening statement that there's a difference between policy and legislation. I'm asking for clarification. Is this the kind of area you're talking about? Do you think policy can work to make these things happen and it does not require legislation to make these things a mandatory management tool, or was it another area that you were referring to? I only want clarification.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

I think I was saying in general that some of what she is looking for could be accomplished without changes to the legislation. That's all I was saying. I don't think I was any more specific than I was with Mr. Martin. I said, for example, on one of the recommendations--I forget which one right now, but she talked about the education component of that. It seems to me you could probably do that without legislation. That was my point.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Minister, my concern has been, on this one in particular, whether we really need legislation to make it happen, if it's working, or if there are other ways to make it more effective or efficient.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

That's the challenge you have here, Mr. Wallace, and I will be glad to see what your recommendations are. I appreciate that.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

That was my question. Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Minister, it is now twenty-five to five. You gave us an hour and we've been here an hour. I'm going to allow you to excuse yourself.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

I think Mr. Martin had one more question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

I think he's going to save it for your staff. We didn't want to take any more of your time.

We do very much appreciate your taking the time and giving us some frank input. I think members learned quite a bit from your perspective. We understand that you don't agree or disagree with everything. We have some work to do, and I thank you for your assistance.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

I appreciate that, and I thank you for your efforts.