Procedure and House Affairs Committee on May 8th, 2018

[Charles Robert]

In terms of dealing with petitions, the House of Commons has control only through the Standing Orders to oblige the government to prepare a response. If it goes to a government department and it doesn't go to the House of Common, well clearly, it's not for you. But if it goes to another department as well as to you, the department may or may not care. And because it does do that, it doesn't give you, as the House, some additional responsibility or obligation, nor does it impose anything on the government. The government's obligation to respond to a petition is due only to the fact that under the Standing Orders, there is a requirement to do it when it goes to the House of Commons. If it goes anywhere else....

I think what we see here is perhaps a misunderstanding of the process on the part of this applicant.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Okay, so this isn't necessary.

[Charles Robert]

I don't think so.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Okay, agreed.

Fourth is to create a portal for members through which they can view petitions, sorted with subject words, and reach out to the petition drafter should they wish to offer a person...one that doesn't have a sponsor. But so far, the rules are that they have to have a sponsor. And they're going to be relatively accessible under this new system, right, where they're all on electronically? So this probably isn't necessary.

[André Gagnon]

I'm not exactly sure I understand the recommendation to start with. Essentially, what I see here is that members of Parliament could choose individuals who would like to present petitions. I think it goes along the lines of the discussion that is initiated by proposal number 1, which is that maybe this group was in a situation where their petition was not presented as rapidly as they thought from the first part. Essentially what they are proposing here is a mechanism by which members of Parliament who are very keen on presenting a petition on subject A would be able to get to petitioners and say, “I'm really looking forward to tabling such a petition. Can I be your sponsor?” It's changing the nature of the relationship, really.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Mr. Richards.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

As I read this, I have a different reading of it. If you notice the part in brackets, it says, “one which does not have a sponsor at that time”. In order for it to be up, it has to have a sponsor.

[André Gagnon]

Exactly.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

I think they're talking about here where they haven't been able to find an MP sponsor, and they don't want to go through the effort of trying to track one down, so they're hoping an MP is going to go and find them. I think that's what this is about.

[André Gagnon]

That's exactly right.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

I think that's probably a little bit of an unrealistic hope. As much as I understand why they would want to do it, I mean, go do your legwork, right?

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Okay. Is the committee in agreement with that?

Number 5 is to better highlight privacy protections. Is that highlighted up front when people are doing petitions?

[André Gagnon]

That information is shared. The guarantees are indicated on the website, and we are, in fact, very proud of what we are doing.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Are they on the form?

[André Gagnon]

If the person has the sense that it was not highlighted enough, we can take a look at the website again and ask, “How can we make it even clearer for those who are signing a petition, starting a petition, or supporting a petition to make sure that they are fully aware of the guarantees that we're offering regarding privacy of information?”

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

When they go in electronically, if I ask to my friend to sign this petition, they go into the House of Commons electronically, they find a petition, and they go to sign, do they see right there that their information is protected?

[André Gagnon]

The information is readily accessible, yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Without them searching all around?

[André Gagnon]

I'm not sure of the level of detail that's provided there.

[Jeremy LeBlanc]

In the various guides that are available on the website, there is a section that deals with data management and explains the privacy protections that exist. It's part of the guide. I think it's probably also part of the terms and conditions that people affirm that they have read before signing. Of course, everyone reads the terms and conditions before checking that box.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Can we just leave this as a friendly suggestion to make sure that, up front, confidentiality is evident?

Mr. Richards.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

You essentially addressed my question, but I think I'll do a follow-up on it. In order to do more than what we have now, in order to comply with this and do more, the stuff they'll certainly read before they agree, what could you imagine that looking like, and what kind of expense would there be in doing that? If someone already has the ability to know this information, what do we do to make it more evident? There's got to be some cost to that, I would assume.

[André Gagnon]

I think that's indicated in here, and again, I'm maybe not sure of understanding the proposal, but essentially what is indicated here is making sure that everyone is aware that their privacy is protected. Maybe our messaging is not exactly as it should be in terms of informing individuals that we are very strict on preserving privacy information. That is maybe what we're alluding to here.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

I'm feeling like we already do it, but what you're saying is maybe you think we could change some of the language so people understand it better.

[André Gagnon]

Yes.