Good morning.
We really appreciate this opportunity, Mr. Murray and I, to appear before you. We know you've already heard from the statutory review committee: Clyde Wells, Doug Letto, and Jennifer Stoddart. They certainly addressed the rationale for the recent changes in Newfoundland and Labrador with respect to our access and privacy legislation.
I've been commissioner for just over three months now, and as a newcomer to access and privacy, I find it quite remarkable how the ability in our present society to collect, analyze, and unfortunately, abuse information has grown dramatically and continues to grow. However, I was surprised to learn that the federal Privacy Act had not really been amended for over 30 years.
The situation that we're in now in the digital age is that, formerly, being secure in your home and being secure in your life meant basically that your home was your castle, and now, with the proliferation of information, its storage, and its use, the keys to that castle exist out there in the digital world, and you can be deprived of your privacy and sense of well-being without anybody coming through your door. It's vitally important that all government institutions collect only that information that is necessary and then do their utmost to safeguard that from inappropriate uses and from being accessed by sources outside of government.
We are in a very enviable position here in Newfoundland and Labrador because of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, 2015. We believe it's one of the best pieces of legislation in the country. However, we recognize that the solutions we are using here and that were implemented here may not apply universally, and perhaps, in particular, may not apply to the federal system. Issues of volume and resources may dictate or require different solutions.
As an example, in regard to mandatory reporting of privacy breaches, we have all breaches reported to us, not just material breaches. However, again, based on our volume of reports, that may be more practical in a jurisdiction such as ours and less practical with an institution the size of the federal government.
The recommendations that have been made by the federal commissioner in terms of necessity for collection, public education, and public research mandate are all, we think, extremely positive. For the most part, I think we support all of the recommendations that have been made by the federal Privacy Commissioner.
We believe that our experience, in terms of now having had over a year to deal with our new legislation and responses to it and accumulate data, may be of some benefit to the committee. Between ourselves, Mr. Murray and I, we will hopefully answer any questions you have today to the best of our ability.
Thank you.