Evidence of meeting #39 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was list.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Are there any further questions on clause 73 as amended? Seeing none, I'll call the question.
(Clause 73 as amended agreed to)
(Clause 74 agreed to)
(On clause 75—Deduction from administrative monetary penalty)
4 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
On clause 75, we have one amendment, moved by Mr. Lake, government amendment 54.
Any discussion?
Monsieur Bouchard.
4 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
Once again, I would like to ask the department representatives to tell me what is meant by “a interim injunction under clause 74.111“.
I would also like an explanation of clause 75, which reads: “If a court determines that a person is engaging in or has engaged in conduct that is reviewable...“
4:05 p.m.
Senior General Counsel, Legal Services, Department of Industry
That is another addition designed to broaden the approach. There are other similar powers elsewhere in the Competition Act. Before a matter can be brought to court, there are often cases where improper activity must be stopped or where more victims and further damage must be prevented. That is the idea of the interim injunction.
Of course, it is done only when a court has been able to consider the facts of a particular case.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Are there any other questions or comments from members?
Seeing none, I'll call the question on government amendment 54.
(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
(Clause 75 as amended agreed to)
(Clauses 76 and 77 agreed to)
(On clause 78)
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
We now go to the consideration of clause 78. I understand there are five amendments for clause 78. We'll begin with Liberal amendment 5.
Do I have a mover for Liberal amendment 5?
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Moved by Mr. Rota. Thank you very much.
Mr. Bouchard, do you have any questions?
4:05 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
Yes, I would like to ask some questions.
They are for the officials.
Could you explain the scope of the prohibition on the collection of personal information? It is in clause 78, but I cannot tell you exactly where.
4:05 p.m.
Policy Analyst, Electronic Commerce Policy, Department of Industry
The idea of clause 78, proposed subsections 7.1(1) and (2), is to limit the collection of electronic addresses—e-mails, IP addresses, and so on—and, in proposed subsection 7.1(3), the idea is to limit the collection of personal information by a computer without authorization.
4:05 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
Okay.
Here is my second question.
Do you think that the wording of the clause could adversely affect investigations on fraud, money-laundering, identity theft or copyright violations?
4:05 p.m.
Policy Analyst, Electronic Commerce Policy, Department of Industry
That would depend on the way in which the clause is interpreted. It also depends on the nature and the scope of the investigation.
We do not think that it should adversely affect an investigation into a private company.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Are there any other questions on the Liberal amendment?
Mr. Lake, go ahead.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
The line of questioning there was different from what it was on the L-5 amendment, right?
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
I don't know if Mr. Rota wanted to speak to amendment L-5 first.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
It's just to avoid confusion. Maybe the officials can comment on that amendment.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
4:10 p.m.
Senior General Counsel, Legal Services, Department of Industry
The reason it's not possible to have exactly the same definition of electronic address in both PIPEDA and the ECPA, the Electronic Commerce Protection Act, is that under PIPEDA certain forms of information, particularly telephone accounts or telephone numbers, are not considered personal information. That's why the two are not parallel, and I would not advise that they be made so.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
