Evidence of meeting #75 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 c-58.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:15 p.m.
Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
That's the one that I know.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
We can go back and you can provide us with any other cases—
5:15 p.m.
Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
We can provide that information, for sure.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
The concern Mr. Baylis is raising is that perhaps the Information Commissioner, in your desire to make as much information available as possible, is not curtailed enough by the laws as they are, or the interpretation of the law. You've told us that in the last eight years, the one time that you had to go to court to resolve such a concern was to find out where the limits actually were, which you did, and then moved on.
November 1st, 2017 / 5:15 p.m.
Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
The Privacy Commissioner could have intervened in that case under the current regime.
5:15 p.m.
Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
Exactly.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Going ahead, that would remain the case under the amendments that you've suggested to us. If the Privacy Commissioner had concerns of the kind Mr. Baylis has suggested, he could intervene at that point and say, “I think there's too much information that's about to be divulged. I disagree. I'm going to argue on behalf....”
5:15 p.m.
Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
Correct. Bill C-58 does provide for the Information Commissioner to be notified if there is to be a recommendation that will become an order. It gives them time to actually decide whether or not to challenge the decision in the Federal Court, which is exactly the same regime that we have now, which has worked for 34 years.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Okay, and you'd agree sunlight is the best disinfectant.
5:15 p.m.
Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
Of course.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Zimmer
Thank you, Mr. Cullen.
As chair, I have one question for the commissioner.
We've heard from different people around our committee and from the Privacy Commissioner as well about the struggle between your two offices. We've heard about that several times.
I just wanted to ask you one question. In your opinion, what is a higher priority for you, the preservation of information or the preservation of privacy?
5:15 p.m.
Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
The greater consideration for me as a regulator is to ensure that when I make a determination on an issue, I apply the provision that is provided for in the act as it has been interpreted by the case law over the last 34 years.
5:15 p.m.
Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
That is the actual answer. That is the actual answer, Mr. Chair.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Zimmer
But given the two options, you chose a different answer.
Can I ask you the question just one more time? What is the higher priority for your office, the preservation of information or the preservation of privacy?
5:15 p.m.
Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
It's the same. What I'm saying is that I am a regulator who has to apply the law. In the law.... For instance, if you asked me the same question in relation to national security, asking me which is my greatest consideration, the disclosure of information related to national security or the preservation of national security interests, my response would be that I have to apply section 15 in the Access to Information Act and apply the existing case law that pertains to this national security exemption. My job as a regulator is to ensure that my recommendations or my orders in relation to that provision are compliant with the law; that's what I have to do.
Those are the bases on which my recommendations are based. I always have to weigh both the interests of transparency and the interests of secrecy. That is exactly what I do. Whether it's personal information, national security, investigations of law enforcement bodies, or commercially sensitive information, my job is always to weigh and balance those interests that are embedded in the Access to Information Act.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Zimmer
Thank you, Madam Commissioner, and thank you for appearing before our committee today.
I will briefly suspend, and we will go in camera to discuss committee business for the next eight minutes.
Thank you.
5:20 p.m.
Information Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
Thank you.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative