Evidence of meeting #39 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 requests.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Liberal
Brian Murphy Liberal Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
It's right there. I'll point it out. Do you want me to highlight that for you?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Order.
For the console operator, when I call “order”, I want all of the other mikes turned off, please.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Please state your point of order, then. You have to state the standing order or the procedure that is not being followed.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
The standing order deals with the point of order raised by Mr. Murphy, which was not heard.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
I wanted to hear. You can't rule his point out of order until he's actually stated it.
Liberal
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
You're excused. I want to hear his point of order, please.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
No, there is no point of privilege.
Mr. Poilievre, you have the floor on debate or on the questioning of the witnesses, but please focus on our work.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
In discussions around privacy and information, there is always a delicate balance, as you know.
I see here, Ms. Rooke, that you are responsible as the director for both access to information and privacy. At the agent of Parliament level, you will of course know that the role of Privacy Commissioner and Information Commissioner are separate. There has been debate about whether or not the two could go together, but the consensus of Parliament has been that they should be kept separate because there is an inherent tension between the two objectives, one being freedom of information, the other being privacy. In order to ensure that there never be a conflict between those two competing interests, they should have different offices.
Have you found in your role as director for access to information and privacy that you feel that tension in your job between the two?
Director, Access to Information and Privacy, Correctional Service Canada
No, actually, I haven't found the tension. We deal with the access requests and we will take into account the provisions of the Privacy Act as they apply under access and vice versa. So no, I haven't found that there is a tension.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Have you ever found access to information requests that would perhaps infringe on the privacy rights of an individual?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Order, please.
I have to raise a question of relevance. This is a discussion I've been involved with before in a special all-party committee that John Bryden had--the discussions about access versus privacy. Members will have to understand that we have to stick to the amendments to be considered or the proposals for consideration to the Privacy Act.
This is for the members and for the witnesses. We need to keep to the order of business, please.
Carry on, please, Mr. Poilievre.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Thank you. I hope your speech did not cut into my time.
Liberal
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Thank you.
We've dealt with this tension between access and privacy for a long time. The chair has some considerable insight into the question. He's just mentioned some of his background in that area. I thank him for that.
My question deals more generally with the way in which we as parliamentarians interface with Corrections Canada on questions related to privacy. Do you believe that Corrections Canada has opportunities to improve its transparency to Parliament in this regard?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
If you don't understand the question, that's okay. We'll move to another question from Mr. Poilievre.