Industry Committee on Oct. 21st, 2009

[Philip Palmer]

No. Again, I'd have the same concern with the ability to use information for the purposes of, first, other domestic acts, particularly PIPEDA and the Competition Act, and second, sharing information that we have gotten in exercising our powers under this act with, for instance, the FTC in the United States or a member of the European Community in Europe.

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

Thank you.

If you will recall, when officials were before the committee we did discuss this very issue. There was a general sense coming from this that officials were in favour of drafting something along these lines to ensure that confidential information proprietary to a business is not ATIPed, not available through access to information.

Is there something the officials can suggest that would alleviate the concern that was raised and was considered by all of us at committee?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Monsieur Leduc.

[André Leduc]

It's our understanding that personal or sensitive business information is already protected under the Access to Information Act.

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

Very good.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Monsieur Bouchard.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I don't think this clause contradicts the clauses referring to foreign states. I would like to hear you say that.

[Philip Palmer]

The real problem is the restriction on the application of this act, that is to say Canada's domestic act. If, on the other hand, one of our foreign partners requested information from Canada, we could use our powers under clause 17 or 19. We can use this information only to implement the Electronic Commerce Protection Act, not, for example, for the purposes of the United States' CANSPAM Act. That's a problem and it undermines international cooperation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you.

Ms. Coady, go ahead please.

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

I'm turning to the officials again, because in this amendment we say that it should be confidential and shall be used only for the purpose of this act, so shouldn't that cover off the concern?

[Philip Palmer]

It's precisely the problem, as I would see it. If it can be used only for the purpose of this act, it limits the CRTC's ability to share information with the Competition Bureau, because there it would be used for the purposes of another act. Similarly for the Privacy Commissioner, it would be used for the purposes of PIPEDA, and even more so in the case of the laws of foreign states, where evidently something like the “can spam” act in the United States is not this act; therefore, we would have to maintain it confidential and not allow it to be sent to someplace where it would be used for the purposes of another act.

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

But that sharing of information would be the purpose of this act, would it not?

[Philip Palmer]

One of the purposes of this act, which we have actually added through clause 60 and through clauses 15, 17, and 19, is to facilitate the ability to share information so that they can be used under other acts, domestic and foreign.

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

So that is the purpose of the act, then?

[Philip Palmer]

That is, yes.

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

So we are moving forward. The language here says that we are keeping it confidential for the use of the purposes of this act. I guess I'm a little confused as to why.... If having in clauses 15, 17, and 19, as you just said, the ability to share information under this act, wouldn't that apply?

[Philip Palmer]

The problem, if you like, is that ECPA itself contains only the four contraventions, clauses 6, 7, 8, and 9. So the purposes of that act are limited to verifying compliance with or breaches of contraventions of those provisions. What we have done in the subsequent provisions of the act is to enable information collected under clauses 17 and 19 to be used for the purposes of other acts.

This is an unusual provision in federal legislation, which is why this particular formulation of proposed new clause 19.1 would frustrate other objectives of the act.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Okay.

Madam Coady, do you have any more questions for officials?

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

I do have one.

We heard from Mr. Leduc that he felt there was enough protection under PIPEDA to alleviate the concern that was duly expressed here at committee and that we all, as a committee, discussed as being something we would like to alleviate.

Do you feel that's sufficient?

[André Leduc]

What I was saying was that the provisions in the Access to Information Act are enough to protect sensitive information and information that is personal in nature from an access to information request.

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

I'm still concerned, quite frankly, Mr. Chair, that we will have concern from the business community around being able to access information that will be gathered under this act.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Do you have any further questions, Madam Coady?

Seeing no further questions from members of this committee, I'm going to call the vote.

(Amendment negatived)

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

There are no proposed amendments to clauses 20, 21, and 22, so I'm going to call them together.

(Clauses 20 to 22 inclusive agreed to)

(On clause 23—Limitation period)

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

There is one proposed amendment. It's government amendment 26, and it is moved by Mr. Lake.

Is there any discussion of government amendment 26?

Seeing no discussion, I will call the vote.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 23 as amended agreed to)

(On clause 24—Options)

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Government amendment 27 on clause 24 is moved by Mr. Lake.

Is there any discussion of government amendment 27?

Seeing no discussion, I'll call the question.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 24 as amended agreed to)

(On clause 25—Representations)