Industry Committee on April 21st, 2015

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Good morning, colleagues.

Good morning, everyone.

Welcome to the 40th meeting of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology. Today we're considering Bill S-4, an act to amend the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act and to make a consequential amendment to another act.

We are pleased to have three experts here, officials from the Department of Industry. Lawrence Hanson is the assistant deputy minister for science and innovation. Christopher Padfield is the director general of the digital policy branch, and John Clare is the director of the privacy and data protection policy directorate.

Thank you very much for joining us, gentlemen, and for being here for questions.

Colleagues, we have, as you can see piled in front of you, quite a number of proposed amendments to the bill. I was saying to my fine officials beside me that a chair never does this enough to get really slick at it, so we'll proceed, with your patience, through the bill. The officials have kindly batched the amendments together.

Unless I have some specific instruction from you, colleagues, on how to proceed, I'll just begin with the first clauses that have no amendments, then we'll move to the clauses that have amendments, and proceed in that way.

Is that fine for everyone?

[An hon. member]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

It appears to be that way. You're always very talkative this early in the morning.

Shall clauses 2 to 5 inclusive carry? There are no amendments proposed for them.

(Clauses 2 to 5 inclusive agreed to)

(On clause 6)

On clause 6 there are a number of proposed amendments, approximately 20.

I should tell you that if amendment NDP-1 is adopted, all the rest cannot be proceeded with, because of course they cannot amend the same line.

We're considering amendment NDP-1 now, which is actually right at the top of our pile here. It's page 1 of the documents you have.

Madam Borg.

[Charmaine Borg, NDP, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Following the testimony we have heard, and several revelations in the media, parliamentarians and society realized that, unfortunately, there are far too many cases where the exceptions in the PIPEDA are used in far too broad and vague a way. There is no transparency regarding the exceptions that permit the sharing of personal information without consent and without a warrant.

I think that today we have to broaden our study and not only examine Bill S-4 and PIPEDA. That is what we must do when we study a bill at second reading.

That said, I move that section 7 of PIPEDA be repealed, so as to correct the flaws in this law that allow for the sharing of personal information without consent and without warrants.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Mr. Lake.

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

If we could, I would just like to go to the officials to maybe get some feedback on the impact of this amendment.

[John Clare, Director, Privacy and Data Protection Policy Directorate, Department of Industry]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As was pointed out, the amendment would essentially repeal section 7 of PIPEDA, which sets out all the exceptions to the requirement to have consent to collect, use, or disclose personal information. This would remove every exception to consent set out in the bill and would mean that a company or an organization would require knowledge and consent every time it collected, used, or disclosed personal information in any context.

The exceptions that are there are set out for various reasons. In certain circumstances, it isn't practical to obtain consent if someone is injured, ill, or deceased, and sometimes obtaining consent would create conflict in law. For example, there's a provision in subsection 7(3) that allows disclosure without consent to comply with a warrant, subpoena, or other court order. This amendment would eliminate all of those exceptions.

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

So even with a warrant...?

[John Clare]

An organization would be faced with either complying with the warrant and violating PIPEDA, or refusing to comply with a warrant to be in compliance, so it creates a conflict in law.

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

This seems like a very broad removal here.

Are there other examples of how...? It seems to me there might even be other examples or even crazier situations whereby someone wouldn't be able to get consent.

[John Clare]

If you look at subsection 7(1), there is an exception to the requirement for consent for journalists or artists to collect personal information to use in a newspaper article, for example. So if a journalist were to interview someone about you as a member of Parliament, if the amendment were to be adopted, the journalist would require your consent to write an article that has a politician's name in it.

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

That doesn't sound so bad.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

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

So on budget day today, for example, if someone wanted to write an article about Joe Oliver, they would need his consent.

[John Clare]

That's correct.

Or if you were to look up information in the phone book, it's personal information. If you want to look up someone's name, you're collecting their personal information and then using it. Technically you require their consent.

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

That's enough, I think.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Ms. Sgro.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Before PIPEDA was in place what would have happened?

[John Clare]

There was no prohibition against the collection, use, or disclosure of personal information.

Remember that PIPEDA creates this general prohibition. It says that you can't collect, use, or disclose without consent, except in these circumstances. Section 7 sets out those circumstances whereby you can collect, use, or disclose without consent.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

But prior to PIPEDA being in effect—

[John Clare]

People could collect, use, and disclose for any purpose, without consent.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Is there any more discussion on NDP-1?

Colleagues, as I mentioned there are some 20-odd amendments here. We're simply talking about NDP-1 right now, and then we have probably closer to 25 that pertain to clause 6.

Are there any suggestions about how you would like me to proceed? I apologize; there are probably 45 amendments for clause 6, now that I see we have a double-sided sheet.

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

I think there are 21 just for clause 6.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Yes, Ms. Sgro.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Given the fact that all the amendments that have been put on the order paper are from opposition parties, and no amendments have been put forward by the government side, just being very practical for time.... I'm happy to spend the next four meetings going through all of them, but just to be clear on the timing, if the government intends to vote against all of the amendments, then I think we need to know that as we continue with our meeting. They have the majority so we're going to go through a very long process of amendments.