Industry Committee on Oct. 21st, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

There is one amendment. It is government amendment 25. Again, here there is a discrepancy, a typographical error in the English language version, that I want to correct.

The English language version of government amendment 25 should read, in the third-last line, “nated person may, for any purpose set out in subparagraphs (a)(i) to (iii)”. We were missing a numeral “i” in that line.

Do the departmental officials agree with that discrepancy in the text? If you look at the French language version, it appears to be correct. It's the English language version that has the typographical error. In the French language version it says “1(a)(i) à (iii)”. We are missing the numeral “i” in the English language version. Is that correct?

Mr. Palmer.

[Philip Palmer]

Yes, that does appear to be correct.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Okay. We'll note that in the record.

We are considering government amendment 25.

Monsieur Bouchard.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Has a mistake been made? This is a matter that concerns the officials. In amendment G-25, proposed paragraph (c) reads: "par substitution, aux lignes 4 à 12, page 17 [...]". Shouldn't it read: "[...] aux lignes 6 à 12, page 17"? Figure "4" should be replaced by "6".

[Philip Palmer]

Is that in French?

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Yes.

[Philip Palmer]

I think the amendment is correct.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

You don't think there's a mistake; it should read "4 à 12" and not "6 à 12", as I suggested.

[Philip Palmer]

I think it's correct.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Line 4 begins with "toute personne s'y trouvant"; and line 6 by "pour lui permettre de vérifier".

[Philip Palmer]

That's line 6. Oh, pardon me.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Mr. Bouchard, I believe you're right.

[Philip Palmer]

Pardon me; you're right. It's the numbering of the two columns that confused me.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

So, it's "6 à 12".

Thank you, Mr. Bouchard.

So the French language version of the amendment has a mistake in it as well, and it should read: lines 6 to 12, not lines 4 to 12. Okay?

Thank you, Mr. Bouchard.

Shall government amendment 25 carry, as corrected by Monsieur Bouchard and the chair?

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 19 as amended agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

We are on to the consideration of a new clause proposed by Liberal members of this committee. It is Liberal amendment 4.

Do I have a mover for Liberal amendment 4?

It is moved by Madam Coady. Would you like to speak to it?

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Yes, thank you.

The members of the committee will remember that we had witnesses before us who raised the issue of access to information, and I raised this issue with the officials when they appeared before us. Documents produced and then kept by the government agency may be accessed via access to information requests.

What we're asking for in this particular amendment is to address our concern that the document produced for and then kept by the CRTC would not be available and not be made public under the Access to Information Act. Obviously, there's a lot of proprietary information that would go with that information. If you look at the Telecommunications Act, it does work towards ensuring that information is kept confidential.

So I've put before you an amendment that would seek to contain information and ensure that it's kept confidential.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Mr. Lake.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

It's my understanding that the Access to Information Act already has provisions to protect personal or sensitive information.

Actually, rather than my talking about it, why don't I ask the officials to comment on what effect this might have.

[Philip Palmer]

There are two impacts. I think the first one is internal to the act.

If we were to say that the information is confidential and shall be used only for the purpose of this act, that would be rendering impossible what we were just discussing: the sharing of information with foreign states, for instance, to help suppress this kind of activity, and, secondly, sharing it with even our domestic partners such as the Competition Bureau and the Privacy Commissioner. In that sense, I think it would frustrate one of the objectives of the bill.

The other aspect is that this provision would actually not shelter from the Access to Information Act without a consequential amendment to schedule 2 of the Access to Information Act.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Masse, Madam Coady, and then Monsieur Bouchard.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to make sure this is correct. Say, for example, that some company had been illegally spamming against the act and that continued. Any information collected in that investigation then couldn't be shared with our international partners. Lastly, you're saying that even for the competition they would then get off the hook from basically having a penalty, because there couldn't be an investigation, and potentially the spam could even continue. Is that the consequence?

[Philip Palmer]

Yes. That is a potential consequence if the harm was happening someplace else.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Madam Coady.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Thank you.

My original wording sent to the drafting clerk did address this. My original wording was that “information collected by the commission pursuant to sections 17 and 19 of this act shall be maintained as confidential by the commission unless it is used for the proceedings under this act”.

Drafting came back as it's before you, so we have a dilemma here, because obviously we want it as used under the proceedings for this act. Would that satisfy the concern?