Information & Ethics Committee on Oct. 19th, 2010

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Yes. That was one of the subjects of our consultations this spring. We are working on that. We're bringing out a position paper.

Google is not the only one dealing with geopositional location technology; some of it could be quite privacy-invasive. What we haven't done is look at the different individual types in terms of even our investigation or not...we're looking at them as examples of deploying a new technology.

Generally, I believe that former Assistant Commissioner Elizabeth Denham did some informal work with Canpages—and I believe there is another company whose name I just forget—in terms of them giving notice in a way that Google never did when they were about to photograph or geomap a certain area.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

You're saying there may also be incidents where they've collected personal data because of the kind of process that was involved?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Yes. I don't believe the process itself is illegal in Canada. The issue is taking the personal information without notice or any form of consent. I haven't really thought of this for a while, I must say, but I believe that we worked with Canpages, so they gave the best type of notice they could, given the technology they're working with. I could get back to you on that.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

So it may be possible that other companies are collecting Wi-Fi transmission points and that kind of thing from using a similar kind of geomapping cartographic process?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Exactly, and using it eventually to send messages to people on their hand-held devices about all kinds of things. In fact, we used those scenarios in the consultation.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

In your annual report, you noted that you thought companies offering this kind of street-imaging application could be doing more in terms of improving notification and blurring technology. Can you say anything more specific about it? Is there something you've asked them to do specifically with regard to those two things?

You've just mentioned improving notification. Can you say something more specific about what kind of notification you would like to see and what problems you've identified with the blurring technology that's in use?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Well, I guess reasonable notification that would get to a wide variety of people whose whatever they had was about to be photographed...maybe not just a newspaper, but maybe some radio advertisements or interviews, things that would get people's attention, so that if they had a problem, they would know how to get in touch with the company.

In terms of blurring technologies, I think we had about a two-year discussion between some of the specialists in my office and Google about the strength of their swirl technique and whether or not it could be unswirled. Do you remember the case of a gentleman who had gone to Thailand and then his swirl was unswirled? That took a while to settle, but it seems to be a fairly strong technology now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Mr. Siksay, your time is up. Thank you very much.

Mr. Easter, you have five minutes.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This is a case that came to our office and does relate to privacy issues. The RCMP, for all the right reasons, have implemented a real-time identification program. I don't know if you've had any of these cases. For the RCMP, it's to ensure that they can call upon rapid access to fingerprinting services.

One of the side effects of this is that if you happen to have the same name as someone who has a conviction and have a birthday quite close—which is the case in this case—and you're applying for a job, then you have to submit yourself to fingerprinting to clear your name. Have you had any of those cases or do you have any advice on where we can go on this?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

I don't have any details of that, but I know that we are working with the RCMP in terms of a privacy impact assessment. I believe we are encouraging the RCMP to possibly narrow the scope and the application of this program, but I don't really have the details here, so I'd have to get back to you on that.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Okay, if you could, please, because certainly you don't want to have to submit to fingerprinting, but I also understand the bind the employer is in. You apply to the RCMP for a criminal check, it comes back, and I guess they have no way of knowing if the names are not the same. But then you have to submit yourself to fingerprinting. It is a problem.

I have no further questions, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Mr. Easter.

Mr. Poilievre, you have five minutes.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

I just want to confirm for the public record if you've had any news about your reappointment.

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Yes. I've been contacted by the Prime Minister's Office. I believe the Prime Minister has written to the leaders of the opposition parties to ascertain their views on a further reappointment for three years.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Can you explain to us why it would be for three years instead of the normal term?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Honestly, 14 years as a privacy commissioner in this fast-changing world would be too long. As I perhaps mentioned, I did spend a lot of time doing very intense administrative work at the beginning of my mandate, so I think I have the energy and interest to go forward for another three years on some of the increasingly interesting and challenging privacy issues.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

So three would be your preference?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

That's right.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

I don't know if anyone wants to take the remainder of my time.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

I can do that. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much for being here today, Ms. Stoddart.

I echo my colleagues' comments both on the issues that have been raised about Veterans Affairs and on the work you have done in your role as commissioner.

My questions are focused on the report you recently tabled and specifically on sections 4.2 and 4.3. Section 4.3 is on “Complaints Closed”.

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Excuse me, honourable member, is this the Privacy Act?

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Yes.

One can understand the impact that you and your staff, through focused efforts, have had in the area of complaints closed. As has been mentioned already in congratulating you on your reappointment, you have done tremendous administrative work in this area.

But I'd like to focus on section 4.2. I notice that the number of complaints and investigations are down this year by approximately 12%. Can you share some possible explanations for that?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

First of all, we've spent an intense four years trying to get rid of a backlog that started to accumulate in the early years of this decade. Fortunately, we had budgetary support, so we eliminated it at the end of the last fiscal year on which we're reporting it.

Concurrently, we're trying to do something in parallel, which is not to refuse to help Canadians, but to answer their questions and help them with their problems at the outset. Very often we see that when people get the information they desire, they can go off and solve the problems themselves, or we can put their minds at rest without going through a whole investigation. Because the Privacy Act is fairly dated, the investigations take on a formal aspect that is long and not necessarily helpful to the individual person, who usually just wants access to their government file.

So that explains why the complaints are down. From an administrative point of view, I think we should stay with the same budget. This is not a time to be increasing it. So if we spend less time on individual complaints--there's already a model wherein this issue is being dealt with and we can refer somebody to it--that frees up resources for some of the big investigations that are very resource heavy.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much.

Before we go to the third round, there's one area I'd like to canvass with you, Madam Commissioner, and that is the budget for your office. Of course, Parliament gives final approval, but the original submission is developed by Treasury Board, with considerable input from the panel on the financing and oversight of officers of Parliament. It's relatively new. It's been in existence now for five or six years.

Can you give us your comments? Are you reasonably satisfied with the input of this panel?