Evidence of meeting #94 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was c-27.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Daniel Konikoff  Interim Director of the Privacy, Technology & Surveillance program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
Tim McSorley  National Coordinator, International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group
Matthew Hatfield  Executive Director, OpenMedia
Sharon Polsky  President, Privacy and Access Council of Canada
John Lawford  Executive Director and General Counsel, Public Interest Advocacy Centre
Yuka Sai  Staff Lawyer, Public Interest Advocacy Centre
Sam Andrey  Managing Director, The Dais, Toronto Metropolitan University

4:30 p.m.

NDP

Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON

Ironically, in Canada, we actually benefit from some of those class actions in the United States while we can't do them here. Canadians are actually protected under U.S. law to be involved in some of the reimbursements in the United States. There are several cases where we have to notify Canadians about them. They actually protect Canadians better than our current system.

Is there anyone else who would like to talk about the privacy tribunal? Even if you have a different opinion, I'm interested in hearing you. If you don't want to jump in at the moment, I'll move to another question.

4:30 p.m.

President, Privacy and Access Council of Canada

Sharon Polsky

I will offer a quick comment. There is some concern as to who will be appointed and by whom. If there's only going to be one privacy expert on the tribunal, who is appointed by the industry ministry, whose interest is to promote commerce, it undermines fairness. We also are concerned, though, that if a commissioner's decision ends up having to be reviewed, and then the offending organization has the opportunity to exhaust all of its legal recourse—as Mr. Lawford said— that this creates delay.

Then a private right of action kicks in. I now get the honour and pleasure to hire a lawyer and spend even more money and more years, with the offending organization having much deeper pockets than most people, I would venture. Up to what point...? By the time they have exhausted their legal recourse, am I even going to be alive?

4:30 p.m.

NDP

Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Thank you very much.

Mr. Williams.

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON

I'd like to talk about AIDA, the AI act, with each one of you. I'm going to ask each one of you and give you some time to answer.

On a scale of one to 10, one being terrible and 10 being good, how good or how bad is this AIDA legislation in this part of the bill right now?

I'll start with Mr. Konikoff.

4:30 p.m.

Interim Director of the Privacy, Technology & Surveillance program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association

Daniel Konikoff

Oh, my God! Do we have to pick a number? Should we try to get on board together with what numbers we're going to go for here?

4:30 p.m.

Voices

Oh, oh!

4:30 p.m.

Interim Director of the Privacy, Technology & Surveillance program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association

Daniel Konikoff

I would rate it south of five, if I'm being generous, although I don't know where we're at. Given our mandate to look at fundamental rights and privacy, it is a failure on both fronts. Maybe five is high.

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON

Mr. McSorley...?

4:30 p.m.

National Coordinator, International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group

Tim McSorley

I give it a two.

4:30 p.m.

Interim Director of the Privacy, Technology & Surveillance program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association

Daniel Konikoff

Do you know what? I'm going to go with two.

4:30 p.m.

Voices

Oh, oh!

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON

That changed back.

4:30 p.m.

President, Privacy and Access Council of Canada

Sharon Polsky

I think you're being very generous at five.

It's a starting point. It has drawn attention. It has turned your minds, and the discussions have turned your minds to some of the very many problems that have to be faced. As a starting point...yes, okay. As to what it is now, I'd say about a one—generously a one and half.

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON

Mr. Lawford...?

November 2nd, 2023 / 4:30 p.m.

Executive Director and General Counsel, Public Interest Advocacy Centre

John Lawford

I think together we each give it a one—so two.

4:30 p.m.

Managing Director, The Dais, Toronto Metropolitan University

Sam Andrey

Maybe a three.... I may be more charitable, but I think it was well intended. I don't ascribe malicious motives to it, but it has a lot that needs to be improved.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON

We'll go to Mr. Hatfield online.

4:35 p.m.

Executive Director, OpenMedia

Matthew Hatfield

I'd rate it between a three and an undeciphered symbol. We simply don't know what AIDA will be in the final version. We don't have every piece of the puzzle.

As a starting point, as a white paper that we could then run a consultation around, sure, it's a great start. However, at the speed it's moving, I can't give it a positive rating.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON

Thank you. I think that follows the testimony that we've heard. It seems that this was just brought as an afterthought—with no public consultation.

I'm going to leave it at that. I think we can all agree on that.

Ms. Polsky, I do want to talk about privacy impact assessments. I know that you have an intimate knowledge of them. I'd like to ask if we should make them more widely used in our privacy regime.

4:35 p.m.

President, Privacy and Access Council of Canada

Sharon Polsky

Should we make them more widely used? Yes, absolutely. The problem comes in when many organizations leave it to the operational people in the departments to do the preliminary assessment, such as on whether they think this new product or system or whatever will have an impact, when the people do not understand what privacy is, what privacy laws require and what the rights and responsibilities are.

They're under the gun. They have budgets. They have deadlines and go, “Nope, no privacy problem here.” They don't understand the unintended consequences. They don't understand the technology, the law or the business side of it. They're looking at it from a very narrow perspective. That's the first point. We need more education. There needs to be a mandate about all of this to the people in the organization.

The other part that's really critical is that an awful lot of organizations require that whoever does the privacy impact assessment follows the guidelines of their jurisdictional privacy regulator commissioner. Those tend to be checklists. They do not want fulsome legal analysis. They do not want the full picture. They want to be able to say, “We did a PIA. Tick that box. Move on. Next. Let's get business done.”

That's the public and the private sector.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON

The EU has legitimate interest assessments that have to be filled out by their privacy oversight bodies. Should we be using our PIAs to better define legitimate interests?

4:35 p.m.

President, Privacy and Access Council of Canada

Sharon Polsky

We should, but we also need to have the people as the GDPR requires. The people who are in the position to do the PIAs, the privacy officers, must be independent within the organization and speak directly to the highest level of executive in that organization.

Now they are underlings. Even when they are lawyers who do the privacy work, a lot of our members who are the access and privacy people in the organization have to report to a very lengthy chain of command within the organization very often, and they don't have much say. They have very little authority. That has to be changed.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Thank you very much.

Ms. Lapointe, you have the floor.