Evidence of meeting #103 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was projects.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Daniel Therrien  Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Barbara Bucknell  Director, Policy, Parliamentary Affairs and Research, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Mark Romoff  President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Council for Public-Private Partnerships
Yvon Lapierre  Mayor, City of Dieppe, New Brunswick
Mike Savage  Mayor, Halifax Regional Municipality
Alex Boston  Executive Director and Fellow, Renewable Cities, SFU Morris J. Wosk Centre for Dialogue

4 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair (Hon. Judy A. Sgro (Humber River—Black Creek, Lib.)) Liberal Judy Sgro

Good afternoon, everyone. I welcome you to meeting number 103 of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 42nd Parliament. Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we're doing a study of automated and connected vehicles in Canada.

With us as witnesses from 4:00 to 4:30, from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, we have Daniel Therrien, Privacy Commissioner of Canada; and Barbara Bucknell, Director of Policy and Research.

Thank you both very much for finding time in your busy schedules to come and give us some information on privacy concerns that we may have on this particular issue.

4 p.m.

Daniel Therrien Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Madam Chair, honourable members of the committee, thank you for inviting us to appear before you today in the context of your study of automated and connected vehicles in Canada.

Modern cars are more than simply vehicles. They have become smart phones on wheels—mobile sensor networks, capable of gathering information about, and communicating with, their internal systems, other vehicles on the road, and local infrastructure. This information is not strictly about the car; it can be associated with the car's driver and passengers, and used to expose patterns or make inferences about those people for a number of purposes not all related to the functioning of the vehicle or safe transportation.

For instance, these vehicles collect information about driver habits and behaviour, biometric and health data, location data, personal contacts, schedules and communications, and entertainment content, which could be used for marketing, usage-based insurance, navigation, and so on.

Most of these data flows in the connected car are very complex and not transparent. Individuals are accustomed to simply getting in a car and driving, and may have little awareness about how the data captured by a connected car may be used in the background, let alone the implications of those uses, or of any options available to limit, disable or otherwise control them.

The benefits available to Canadians through the arrival of connected and autonomous cars may be significant. However, consumers' trust in these technologies will only take hold when the appropriate balance is reached between information flow and privacy protection.

Over the past several years, my office has set out to identify improvements to the current consent model under federal private sector privacy law. What became clear to us throughout this work is that individuals want to retain the ability to make decisions about their data, and that organizations still need to do a better job of explaining what they propose to do with the personal information they collect. In an attempt to improve this situation, we have updated our guidelines for online consent, and they now outline seven underlying principles for obtaining meaningful consent.

In the context of the connected car, there may be certain scenarios where it would be inappropriate for the driver to control how the information is used, for instance, when the data is necessary for road safety or proper functioning of the vehicle. However, there are many other scenarios or purposes that should be subject to individual choice. In that respect, we think our guidelines for consent will be useful.

While we believe that meaningful, informed consent continues to have an important role in protecting privacy, it is also clear that the consent model is challenged in this new world of increasingly complex data flows and business models. In these situations, as is clearly the case with connected cars, consent needs to be supported by other mechanisms, including industry codes of practice, privacy by design, and strong accountability and respect for privacy rights by organizations. Likewise, proactive enforcement is required to ensure independent review of compliance with these requirements and to hold organizations to account.

The time has come for more modern privacy laws, which are urgently needed to protect us as both citizens and consumers. I am calling for amendments to the law to allow my office to go into an organization to independently confirm that the principles in our privacy laws are being respected without necessarily suspecting a violation of the law. These are not extraordinary powers, but rather authorities that have been exercised for a long time by other regulators. This shift towards stronger accountability of organizations and more proactive enforcement of privacy laws is necessary to achieve truly meaningful privacy protection in a technologically complex world.

To conclude, I would like to acknowledge the study by the Standing Senate Committee on Transportation and Communications on this very topic. I was very encouraged by the Senate committee's report, which gave significant weight to the privacy issues that we raised during its study, and made four privacy-focused recommendations.

I note in particular its recommendation 8, which reiterates my recommendation that the law be amended to empower my office to proactively investigate and enforce industry compliance with PIPEDA, as well its recommendation 10, which is to bring together relevant stakeholders to develop a coordinated framework for connected vehicles, with privacy protection as one of the key drivers. I look forward to the government's response to this report and to playing a key role in future developments.

Engaging and informing consumers so that they can make reasonable choices, empowering the regulator, and setting in motion a coordinated approach to connected vehicles clearly resonates with how my office envisions dealing with issues of consent and the privacy challenges associated with connected vehicles.

Thank you very much, and I look forward to your questions.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro

Thank you very much.

We will go questions.

Mr. Liepert, you have five minutes.

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB

I'm having trouble differentiating why automated vehicles would be any more susceptible to privacy issues than current vehicles. Really, we're talking about technology here and what technology can gain, whether it's in an automated vehicle or not.

Can you explain to me why driverless vehicles would be more prone to privacy issues than vehicles currently on the road today?

4:05 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Daniel Therrien

The distinction is not quite between driverless vehicles and current vehicles. It's more between cars that are connected to the Internet, whether they're driverless, semi-autonomous, or partially autonomous, and old model cars that are not connected to the Internet. The privacy risks arise out of the fact that currently, and certainly in the future, cars are connected to the Internet in part for transportation safety reasons, which are, of course, very legitimate and need to happen, but also for other reasons. For instance, when somebody drives their vehicle in 2018—and maybe it will be different in 2030—and behaves a certain way and goes to certain places, data is collected and potentially shared on driver behaviour and the location of an individual. Clearly personal information is collected by these cars, which are connected to the Internet, that could be shared for any number of purposes, such as for marketing, insurance, and so on.

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB

I understand that. To me it's more about the advancements in technology and how the automobile world is using technology, whether it's GPS or whatever, than it is about a line between driverless cars and cars with drivers. It's more a gradual implementation of technology that would cause the privacy concerns. Is that fair?

4:05 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Daniel Therrien

It's the increased collection of personal information that comes with new technology, particularly technology that connects the car to the Internet for all kinds of purposes.

To be clear, as I've tried to be in the statement, the development of connected cars brings many benefits to the environment, road safety, and so on, but with that comes a much greater collection of personal information. This does not mean it should not happen, but it should be regulated.

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB

I should probably know this, but where do we stand today with the various recommendations you made to government that you outlined? Where are we on those? Are they sitting on a shelf?

4:10 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Daniel Therrien

The government has not yet responded to these recommendations. We've made similar recommendations to the Senate to which the Senate agreed, and the government needs to respond. That's one stream. We've made similar recommendations to the ethics committee of the House. They go beyond cars, but they're very similar recommendations. The ethics committee also agreed in large part with our recommendations, and the government's response is still due. The government is within its time to respond to these reports, but we have not seen the government's response yet.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro

You have 30 seconds.

4:10 p.m.

Conservative

Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB

I'm good.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro

Thank you.

Mr. Hardie, go ahead.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC

Thank you, Madam Chair.

This is a fundamental question. The vehicle is out there moving round and it's engaging with the Internet of things. This is off in the future. Is it necessary to develop a record? Does data actually need to be captured and stored somewhere?

4:10 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Daniel Therrien

If you're talking about—

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC

I know you're not a vehicle technician, but that question has to be asked. The issue here is the collection, storage, and disposition of records.

4:10 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC

Somebody needs to see if in fact records need to be created in the first place in order for these machines to do their job.

4:10 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Daniel Therrien

There will be information that may not be personal, say, the behaviour of a vehicle, the functioning of the vehicle itself, which in some cases will not lead to personal information. That's one set of issues, but there's another set of issues which is of concern to us, or at least of interest to us, which has to do with the collection of personal information from the car to outside the car.

For instance, there's driver behaviour. There will be some of this collection, which may be necessary for transportation safety or other regulatory purposes. We're not saying it should not be recorded, but if personal information is at stake, the principle under privacy law is that it should only be collected when necessary and should be retained only as necessary for the regulatory purpose. That's at the general level.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC

I have other questions, so maybe we'll have a look offline into more of those details.

What do you contemplate as far as real-time monitoring of a vehicle is concerned?

4:10 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Daniel Therrien

Do you mean for safety reasons?

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC

For any reason. The technology is there that allows you to actually track a vehicle and its movements. Do you see your legislation addressing that?

4:10 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Daniel Therrien

PIPEDA is a principles-based legislation, and I think it can be interpreted as applying to these various collections of information but enhanced with more specific rules. That's a reason why we agree with the Senate committee, which recommended that government work with the private sector and hopefully with us, to develop either a code of practice or more specific rules than the very high-level principles in PIPEDA.

PIPEDA is able to do that but needs to be enhanced with either a code of practice or more specificity, and government and industry need to work on that, with our assistance, we hope.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC

Do you think we could come to a point where people who go out and buy a car have an option to opt out, that is, to literally unplug the module that does all of this and go old-timey, drive it yourself, and do without all of the electronic monitoring, etc.?

Is that something that would be of interest to a privacy commissioner?

4:10 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Daniel Therrien

I think that will be possible for certain collections and sharing of information, but probably not for all. For instance, if we imagine a world in a few years where there is a mix of autonomous and semi-autonomous cars, there has to be sharing of information between the car and the infrastructure, the road, to ensure that cars function in a safe manner. I do not envisage that the collection and sharing of information to ensure road safety is something that people will be able to opt out of.

On the other hand, there are more benign uses of information, such as the contact list on your telephone that's connected to the car, or things like that, where, yes, there should be an opt-out.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro

Thank you very much.

Mr. Aubin, go ahead.