Human Resources Committee on June 15th, 2006

[France Bonsant, Bloc, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

I'm not talking about one person having two SINs, but about four different people have the same SIN. I'm concerned about identity theft. These days, anything can easily be replicated. We're seeing more and more cases where people living in one province receive a bill for $150,000 from a jewellery store located in a different province.

Can you explain to me why Service Canada officials can't seem to realize the same SIN is associated with three or four individuals?

[Hy Braiter, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Service Delivery - Service Canada, Department of Human Resources and Social Development]

If I may, there are other aspects. The social insurance number is used for obtaining various benefits. In all of the benefit programs that Service Canada administers--and likely all other provincial departments--it would quickly come to the fore if tax was being deducted for an individual many times simultaneously. The CRA would pick that up and inform us immediately, and our investigation would commence.

Canada Pension Plan premiums are deducted and recorded by us, remitted to us, based on a social insurance number, so if there were four people working on the same social insurance number, we would be getting a lot of premiums, and immediately the flags would go up in the computer systems of the Canada Pension Plan, similarly with the Quebec Pension Plan, and so on.

We do match our benefit files with the CRA files, and we match with employment insurance files and the premiums there. If there were multiple people working on the same social insurance number, we would immediately notice an anomaly coming up. In these matches, we send the observations to our investigators across the country--and we have 1,800 investigators. They would start an investigation based on that.

It would be very difficult for multiple people to work on the same SIN with all of this information coming in to the various programs for which they're credited, or even for people to work on false SINs and multiple addresses. So it's not just the social insurance number integrity, it's the flagging of these anomalies when they claim benefits; and then the cleaning up of the situation, investigating the situation, is important.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Ms. Bonsant.

We're going to move on to Mr. Martin, Five minutes, sir.

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Thank you very much.

My concern this morning is the question both of identity theft and also the possible sharing of information through these systems and the relationship you have with the private sector in turning over numbers. What kind of information is shared, what kind of information is gleaned, who holds that information, and what access do people get to that information? It seems that when somebody hacks into a system and steals somebody's identity, not only do they make that person's life hell on wheels in terms of the activity that happens then on credit cards and all kinds of things, but also there's possible access to further information as well.

Could you talk to me for a few minutes about the relationship you have with other organizations, the private sector, for example, because that number is shared with employers--and how you protect the integrity of the system, that sharing of information. Who holds that information, and what are the rules around that?

[Charles Nixon]

Thank you.

That's a topical question. The issue of identity theft is of great interest to us too. That's a good reason why, among others, we are in the process of developing this code of practice on the social insurance number. We think it's important. It was flagged earlier; the population needs to understand the use of a SIN, how it should be protected, etc. So this code of practice has been created to provide that kind of information. I think it's timely to remind everybody again, and we will be consulting with groups this summer and be issuing that in the fall.

Also, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, PIPEDA, was passed in 2000. It enhances the protection of personal information in the private sector. Firms pay employees and collect social insurance numbers from their employees to prepare their payroll, which includes deduction of tax and collection of premiums for employment insurance or the Canada Pension Plan. They remit those to CRA on our behalf using the social insurance number, and we account for those on the basis of that number. We do not exchange information the other way. The private sector collects information for us for the prescribed uses of programs and taxes, and we use that money to clear the accounts of taxes and to assess benefits for those programs.

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

My question is around the use of the SIN. You talk about working with Service Canada to provide an array of services and to somehow funnel everything into one place. Every now and again, the idea of a super card of some sort that would be used for everything, including your health care, is put out there. Is it fair for me to suggest that the road we seem to be going down now with Service Canada and the use of the SIN and the consolidation of that process might lead us to a place where we find ourselves logically considering some kind of super card that everybody would have, that might replace the passport, for example? We talk right now about trying to find a card that would, if the Americans decide they're going to demand passports to get into their country.... They're talking about the possibility of another card instead of a passport; those are some of the alternatives. In your thinking, in your circles, is there any talk about that going on at the moment?

[Charles Nixon]

I can come at it two ways. First, the social insurance number remains a file indicator, from our perspective. We have authorized programs that use it. In Service Canada, we have taken on new services that haven't involved the social insurance number because they're not entitled to use it. As of April, we have been the delivery agent for pleasure craft licences. That doesn't involve a social insurance number. So on the one hand, it's not necessary to have everything use one number.

But you're right in looking down the road and asking whether, if we want to work in a more integrated way with Canadians in terms of providing better service, we in fact have the right approach. We are talking to the Privacy Commissioner and the Treasury Board, which is the keeper of SIN policy, about that. But certainly, we loyally implement whatever the government of the day decides to do and asks for.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Martin.

Mr. Brown, you have five minutes, please.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The first question I have in reference to the presentation is about proof of identity, which you mentioned, in terms of utilizing original documents. Certainly, I can appreciate it in terms of how it enhances security. I'm curious about what the reaction to that has been, and also if there have been any cases where there have been inhibitions on access because of it. Are there any segments within our population that are having difficulty with that new policy?

[Charles Nixon]

I think everybody understood, in the end, that this was the way to go. Naturally it presented a change for some people, certainly when we put an expiry date on the 900 SINs, which are the social insurance numbers that are used for temporary workers in Canada. So each year they have to re-get them, if you like, whereas before they were kept open, which was not considered the way to go at it with integrity. So we changed that, and that helped us reduce our gap, if you like, which the Auditor General just spoke about.

I don't think there has been a big outpouring against this. I think people understand that it's what you need to have to truly prove who you are. The documents we use have come out of a conversation we had with other departments in the federal government and provinces to ensure that we are using, truly, the most robust documents to establish something as important as a social insurance number.

I think we have found that there are tiny populations that perhaps are a bit inconvenienced by this because of where they might have been born. For instance, we've had to make sure there's an extra step, if you like, for Canadian children who were born abroad. So there's an extra step in doing that. We find these things out along the way. But basically the system is working well.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

In terms of senior citizens, is there any noticeable challenge there with original documents?

[Charles Nixon]

First and foremost, perhaps I can share with you that over 90% of our social insurance numbers are issued to people under 16. So it would be pretty shocking for somebody to get that far into senior-land and not have a SIN. It's possible, though. I can't think of an instance. Maybe others can.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

In terms of the pilot projects, I heard you mention that there are eight hospitals doing a pilot project. Where are those pilot projects going on?

[Charles Nixon]

They're in Ontario. We can get that information for you. I don't have it off the top of my head.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Is there any evidence yet on how that's going?

[Charles Nixon]

It's going extremely well. Ninety-five percent of people have signed up for a social insurance number through this process, and they're very satisfied with the reduction in paperwork they've had to go through to get a social insurance number for their infants.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

If there's any information you could pass on to the committee on that progress and where the pilot projects are, I'm sure they'd be interested in seeing that.

[Charles Nixon]

Sure. Yes, we'll be happy to do that. They're 98% satisfied, so that's pretty good.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

That's very good.

In terms of the vital events agreements, you mentioned that there are agreements right now in New Brunswick, Ontario, and B.C. Are we expecting agreements to be reached in other provinces?

[Charles Nixon]

Yes, we've been in discussions with all provinces for some time. I think it's safe to say that we want an electronic exchange of information, but not all vital statistics agencies in provinces are fully ready to work in that capacity; some of them are still keeping books, if you like. We expect, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, to have substantial progress over the next year.

I was just at a meeting of federal-provincial deputies of service earlier this week, and this area was of importance to everybody. It not only benefits us, but it also benefits them. When you think of the outlays that provinces and territories have for health care and social assistance and things like that, the integrity of those systems is extremely important to them, just as the integrity of programs such as employment insurance, the Canada Pension Plan, and old age security is for us.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Would it be overly optimistic to expect the other seven provinces to come on board in the next year or two?

[Charles Nixon]

That's what we hope.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Our next round is back to the Liberals; I believe at this point they're okay.

But first we're going to move over to Mr. Dykstra, for five minutes.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I won't take my full time, but I did want to ask a question in regard to the Auditor General being here this morning. Obviously her office is coming back to do a review of the audit. I wanted to get your response to this. Do you feel prepared or do you feel the review will go well, based on the recommendations that were made a number of years ago?