We see teased out here in various different comments that the Privacy Commissioner in this case is saying essentially that if you add “generally accepted best practices” into the legislation or the definition of anonymization, this could open the door.
I think our position is that it's the opposite, that in fact putting this in there allows for the evolution and the emergent properties of best practices to help inform.
Could you provide a better rationale? I feel like this is the main difference. Mr. Masse is pointing to the OPC and wanting to suggest that he's siding with the OPC.
We're not against the OPC. It's what is the best mechanism to encourage anonymization and to do so in a way that recognizes that the technology is advancing and evolving.