Evidence of meeting #109 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was question.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Ms. Anand, respectfully, you're saying that it's not mandatory. Are you just suggesting that they do privacy assessments and that it's not a directive, not within the mandate of departments to do this?
Liberal
Anita Anand Liberal Oakville, ON
Departments have to respect the Privacy Act. That's the role of all of us: Make sure that personal—
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I would prefer that you answer the questions.
Is a PIA not included in the Privacy Act?
Liberal
Anita Anand Liberal Oakville, ON
The PIA is not mandatory. It is part of the directive of the Treasury Board. The Privacy Commissioner provides advice and information to us relating to—
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
When you say “directive”, are you saying it's not mandatory? Help me understand that.
Liberal
Anita Anand Liberal Oakville, ON
Directives are mandatory, but it provides circumstances in which Treasury Board tools should be implemented. Every single item in the directive provides guidance to departments, and then departments can choose to—
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
With two minutes left, I'm going to cut to the chase. I think we've worked together long enough to know that I'll cut right to the chase.
I am watching with interest. It seems that in your reflections, you're going to be modernizing it for the Treasury Board. We heard in testimony from departments that if it were mandatory, there would be clearer guidelines, so let's just cut to the chase. Will you be making privacy impact assessments mandatory on a move-forward basis to ensure that the privacy of not just Canadians but also those who are employed in the federal service is protected, not just by directives but through mandatory privacy impact assessments? Are you going to legislate this and make it part of the—
Liberal
Anita Anand Liberal Oakville, ON
This is not legislation. A PIA directive is through the Treasury Board. It is not legislation—
NDP
Liberal
Anita Anand Liberal Oakville, ON
We are in the midst of updating the directive. We are considering a number of avenues.
Regardless, I expect compliance and I will be reviewing the directive to ensure it is strengthened going forward.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I just need a straight answer from you, Ms. Anand. Are you going to make it mandatory or not?
Liberal
Anita Anand Liberal Oakville, ON
We're in the process of updating it, and I'd be happy to come back and talk to you once this directive is updated.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
—and you can make that statement right now and say, “Yes, we're committed to going forward so we don't end up back in this mess.”
Liberal
Anita Anand Liberal Oakville, ON
The Privacy Act is also looking at changes right now, so we are coordinating with Minister Virani and the Privacy Commissioner about how to ensure compliance occurs. Those discussions are ongoing. It is not my style to rush—
Liberal
Anita Anand Liberal Oakville, ON
—into making major changes in the directive or suggesting such changes in the law, but we are taking our careful time to make sure that we get this right and, as I said, it's just a few months away from when we will be issuing a revised directive.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Okay. I have another two-minute round, and I'm going to pick up on this conversation and ask that you not run the clock out.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Mr. Green. Thank you, Minister.
That completes our first six-minute round.
We're going to go for five minutes now. We have Mr. Barrett, followed by Mr. Sorbara.
Mr. Barrett, go ahead, please.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
We've heard there are 635 IT middlemen that the Government of Canada does business with. Is that number correct?