Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to participate in today's debate on Bill C-315. I wish to acknowledge the initiative put forward by the hon. member for Cariboo-Chilcotin in his desire to see the privacy of Canadian citizens protected. However, I feel there are several weaknesses with the bill. As a result, I will not be lending my support to its passage.
The issue of privacy is perhaps a very central one in the technological society of today. However, we must not confuse the broader issue of privacy protection, an issue which we are pleased to see debated in the House in the context of this bill, with the reality of Bill C-315. While it is designed to protect privacy in the context of the sale of marketing lists, it will scarcely achieve that because it is so narrowly crafted.
Here again are some of the features of the bill. It is designed to stop the sale of marketing lists without the consent of individuals whose names are on the list. Before selling a list containing names and personal information of individuals, a federal corporation must send a notice to the individual seeking consent for the sale.
The firm must ensure it receives consent and has not received a request to remove the name from the list. If it has, it must remove the name or particulars pertaining to the individual within 10 days.
A firm which buys a list must also send a notice to the individual informing the person of what is on the list, where it came from and that he or she may request to have their names or data removed from the list. Requests for removal of names or data must be processed within 10 days and corporations must send confirmation to the individual.
Contraventions of the act are punishable by fines of up to $5,000 for the first offence and up to $10,000 for subsequent offences.
I do not support Bill C-315, because I feel that it is flawed in several ways. The definition of "personal information" is not comprehensive and does not meet the current standards of related federal and provincial acts. Marketing lists are not sold, they are rented. In its present form, this bill would not affect customary business practices.
It would be inconsistent with the Quebec privacy act, which includes a carefully drafted section on the use of name lists. Moreover, the bill only applies to a limited number of federally regulated corporations. It would not prevent the vast majority of list sales and would affect only a fraction of the problem of protecting personal information, which would give consumers a false sense of security.
The cost to businesses would be prohibitive, and consumers would receive notices seeking their consent as another wave of intrusive advertising.
The government is considering various aspects of the protection of personal information. Consumers are becoming increasingly concerned about what will happen to their personal information in the interconnected world of the information highway. They want the government to react and legislate.
Canadian businesses want to enjoy the advantages of an electronic business environment where bureaucracy and paperwork can be reduced, where they can create a closer relationship with their customers and business partners and administrative processes can be simplified and computerized.
If there are to be rules regulating the use and protection of personal information, businesses want those rules to be consistent and predictable.
The information highway advisory council presented a number of recommendations in its final report, including a call for the federal government to table flexible framework legislation based on the Canadian Standards Association model privacy code. This model privacy code is the product of a consensus committee of consumer representatives, key industry players such as the banks, telecom companies and the direct marketing association and provincial and federal government representatives. It makes a sound basis of consensus for us to start from when we are thinking about the protection of privacy.
We are studying these recommendations now with a view to action and to presenting a much more comprehensive approach to the problem. The Minister of Industry will be making an announce-
ment for the protection of personal information in the context of the government's response to the report of the information highway advisory council.
While I agree with the spirit of Bill C-315, I believe the points which I have outlined clearly explain why the scope of the bill is too narrow and why it cannot be as effective as the hon. member would like it to be.