Information & Ethics Committee on June 19th, 2012

[The Chair, NDP, Pierre-Luc Dusseault]

Thank you.

[Adam Kardash]

My one comment is that it's important to highlight that the companies that have been mentioned are U.S.-based companies, and the extent to which they even carry on in Canada is something that's in question. If they did, they'd be subject to a considerable set of requirements that would curtail the activities they would otherwise be able to do in the U.S.

So it's important to keep in mind that those aren't Canadian-based companies carrying on these types of activities; it's U.S. companies that have been mentioned.

[The Chair, NDP, Pierre-Luc Dusseault]

Unfortunately, your time is up.

Mr. Dreeshen has the final five minutes today.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for attending, witnesses. It's been very interesting.

Mr. Boulerice was just speaking of something I was trying to get my head around, that being, who are these data brokers and how are they making their money? I suppose as a committee that's something we can drill down to, and if you have any other information, I'm sure we'd like to get hold of that.

Mr. Kardash, one of the things you had mentioned earlier as well was the Alberta and the Alberta-B.C. documentation and the expectations. I'm sure our committee would appreciate getting that contact information so we can also review that.

Another thing you also talked about, Mr. Kardash, in your four points was the constitutional impact that would have to be reflected upon. So I wonder if you could expand on that first.

[Adam Kardash]

Okay.

PIPEDA is grounded upon the constitutional authority in the second branch of the federal trade and commerce power. When initially it came into force, there was some question about the constitutional validity. That dropped off, for reasons unknown to myself.

Very recently, the Supreme Court of Canada issued a decision in the context of a national securities administrator and the movement to establish that. In the context of considering the establishment of a national securities administrator, the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously declared that the reliance on the trade and commerce power would be unconstitutional.

This, at least for those of us in the privacy arena, led to a natural question about the extent to which it's applicable to PIPEDA, and especially in the context of an environment where more enforcement powers might be provided to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada.

It's for constitutional experts to consider. I'm no constitutional expert. It's just that this was an important decision issued by the Supreme Court of Canada that is worthy of consideration in the context of any legislative initiative, in particular any that would expand enforcement powers, at least in my view.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Thank you.

Ms. Grimes, you went through four different points. You were talking about child-specific regulations on data, clearer articulation of informed consent, and I believe freedom of expression of rights, as well as leadership and enforcement.

You also spoke of some Canadian businesses that have really shown some brilliant practices. I'm just wondering if you could expand on that for a minute.

[Dr. Sara Grimes]

Yes. I'm really glad you asked that question, because I love talking about these good examples as opposed to some of the scarier and more extreme practices that can be found.

Some examples of great Canadian social media companies include Storybird, which is Ottawa-based, I believe, but they have offices in Toronto as well. Their privacy policy is written for kids and parents. It explains all kinds of things. It even talks about the things that they don't do—such as data collection practices that are found on other sites that they don't do—just as a way of making sure that they distinguish themselves from those practices. Storybird is a social media site that allows kids, parents, and teachers to create picture books and trade them. It's actually quite vibrant. It's being used in schools, so it's really great to see that they're all seeing this really great privacy policy.

Another example is Frima Studio, which is Montreal-based. They create online games. I watched them actually struggle for quite a few years with their privacy policy in terms of service, to the point where it got to this child-friendly language, very well articulated, in an explanation of all kinds of very complicated legal processes. Again, they also explain the things that they didn't do, as well as the things that they did do.

I guess a last example would be zinc Roe, a Toronto-based company. They create apps. They've been really at the forefront of engaging with academics, child advocates, and parents in terms of figuring out what the best practices are for how to deal with information that toddlers are creating and sharing, and information that parents are creating about their toddlers. It's a very sensitive area. They're very much engaged and involved in coming up with these very ethically informed best practices.

Those are three examples. I would love to see them more involved in these debates, because they have great ideas and they're actually putting them into practice.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, NDP, Pierre-Luc Dusseault]

Your time is up. That concludes the testimony from our three guests today. Thank you for being here.

I will suspend the session for a few minutes and then we will come back to discuss future committee business.

[The Chair, NDP, Pierre-Luc Dusseault]

We are now ready for the second item on the agenda.

Mr. Warkentin, do you want to say something?

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd just move that we move into camera for committee business.

[The Chair, NDP, Pierre-Luc Dusseault]

Mr. Warkentin has moved a motion to continue in camera. As the motion is not debatable, we will have a recorded vote.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4)

[Proceedings continue in camera]