Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Again, I want to emphasize that I think there are many provisions in this bill that Canadians are looking for and feel are long overdue, and they are happy to see. I think it's unfortunate that there are some other provisions in this bill that are creating a lot of concern. Canadians are very concerned about their digital privacy, which is why this bill is being brought in. Yet, the area of warrantless disclosure is one that has been highlighted. It was highlighted at the Senate committee. While there may be absolutely legitimate areas where it makes sense to have warrantless disclosure, it's the lack of oversight that's troubling here.
I just want to cite quickly a couple of pieces of testimony on Bill S-4. First of all, Peter Murphy, who is a partner at a Canadian law firm, Gowling Lafleur Henderson, says again there are some welcome changes in Bill S-4. But he also goes on to comment in particular on the provisions allowing for disclosure of personal information without consent between organizations in support of investigations and breaches of law agreements or fraud cases of financial abuse, and I'm quoting:
This change would seem to permit fishing expeditions by companies seeking to sue individuals. For example, copyright holders would have grounds to freely obtain lists of internet addresses of individuals to find and sue internet downloaders. This seems to be a significant invasion of privacy if reasonable controls are not added to the proposed wording.
Michael Geist, who is a law professor here at the University of Ottawa, is an expert on digital matters, and he says:
Unpack the legalese and you find that organizations will be permitted to disclose personal information without consent (and without a court order) to any organization that is investigating a contractual breach or possible violation of any law. This applies both past breaches or violations as well as potential future violations. Moreover, the disclosure occurs in secret without the knowledge of the affected person (who therefore cannot challenge the disclosure since they are not aware it is happening).
So, my question is, why is there not greater accountability, greater oversight, to ensure that this provision, if you do believe it is necessary, is not abused?