Evidence of meeting #123 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was elections.
A video is available from Parliament.
12:15 p.m.
Constitutional and Legal Adviser, National Board of Directors, Liberal Party of Canada
Yes.
12:15 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Okay.
Last June, this committee passed a decision that the parties should fall under privacy laws, PIPEDA specifically. Do you support that recommendation?
I'll start with our Conservative friend.
12:15 p.m.
Privacy Officer and Director of Membership, Conservative Party of Canada
As I mentioned a couple of times earlier in this room, I would leave that to Parliament. As the party, we would enforce whatever rules are placed upon us to make sure we're compliant.
12:15 p.m.
NDP
12:15 p.m.
Privacy Officer and Director of Membership, Conservative Party of Canada
It would require significant consultation and development or redesign of our processes, but—
12:15 p.m.
Privacy Officer and Director of Membership, Conservative Party of Canada
—if it was brought into law, we would certainly continue to exist as a party.
12:15 p.m.
Constitutional and Legal Adviser, National Board of Directors, Liberal Party of Canada
We would not support the application of PIPEDA en masse and en bloc to political parties in the sense that, as it's currently drafted, it's intended to address commercial activity. It's not intended to address political activity.
12:15 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Right now, we have no laws governing privacy in political parties. As it was described by the Privacy Commissioner, it's the wild west.
According to the Chief Electoral Officer, Bill C-76, which you referenced earlier, has nothing of substance in it when it comes to privacy. The status quo will continue, which is that none of you are under any legal obligations when it comes to privacy as pertains to the federal laws. Is that right?
12:15 p.m.
Constitutional and Legal Adviser, National Board of Directors, Liberal Party of Canada
As it currently stands, there may be certain situations, but I don't think I can speak to that issue directly. What I can say is that PIPEDA, as it currently stands, is not an appropriate tool for managing political parties and political engagement in this country.
12:20 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
That's interesting because we even recommended one step down from PIPEDA, and your representatives from your party rejected that as well. The status quo is nothing. The Chief Electoral Officer and the Privacy Commissioner have all recommended that we have something. What's the New Democrats' position on this?
12:20 p.m.
Director of Operations, New Democratic Party
As I've said a number of times in this proceeding, we have said as a party before, and will continue to say, that we thoroughly believe that all political parties should be playing by the same rules. There should be a clear set of rules. We believe that the way to do that is to bring political parties under the jurisdiction of PIPEDA.
12:20 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
You're all keen observers of politics. You watched the recent U.S. presidential election, the Brexit referendum that happened in England, the implications of Cambridge Analytica—
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
October 30th, 2018 / 12:20 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Let me just end on this.
Twenty-three years ago today we had a referendum in this country in Quebec. If a similar referendum were held in these contexts right now and the political parties were hacked because there wasn't proper privacy protections in law, imagine the result of that vote in Quebec, as it was with Brexit in England. There would be suspicion and the reality of foreign influence over a referendum question. A pivotal referendum question in Canada would be affected by outside sources.
Would that real threat not present us with more urgency to actually do something about this in Canadian law, something that you, apparently, could abide by if we passed such legislation?
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Zimmer
That's a great question to leave hanging in the room as we close today.
Thank you for coming today, Mr. Bailey, Mr. Fenrick and Mr. Calvert. We much appreciate your attendance at our committee as the officially recognized parties. Again, thank you for your appearance today.
The meeting is adjourned.