Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C-54. As I told this House previously, this bill is about a fundamental value in our society, namely the protection of privacy.
It has an impact beyond this chamber. This morning, there was an article in Le Devoir entitled “Increasing Pressure for the Protection of Consumers' Privacy”. It discusses the threats to our privacy and the need for consumers to be informed of their rights.
It also discusses the bill we are debating today, emphasizing that the federal legislation will be imposed on any province that has not passed its own legislation in this respect within three years.
The need for a bill protecting personal information and privacy is not new. Most provinces have already passed such legislation. The federal government is the one dragging its feet when it comes to taking its responsibilities and introducing a bill governing federally regulated businesses.
In fact, we expected this government to draw on existing provincial legislation to bring forward a bill that is coherent, effective, clear and in harmony with provincial jurisdictions. Unfortunately for all Quebeckers and Canadians, this bill is wide off the mark.
Instead of protecting privacy as it should, this bill only protects the right of large private businesses to make profits with as few restrictions as possible. This is unacceptable. The federal government must go back to the drawing board as soon as possible. It must introduce a bill that really deals with the protection of privacy.
If it is not yet convinced of the urgency of the situation, it should contact the president of the Quebec Commission d'accès à l'information, Paul-André Comeau. It will see that the Quebec government receives 2,000 calls each month from people concerned with the protection of their privacy.
The Liberal Party is fuelling the cynicism against politicians by using this empty and confused initiative to try to convince our fellow citizens that it is concerned with the protection of privacy. But it does not say it introduced a bill that is simply in favour of commerce, a bill that is only based on voluntary compliance by businesses as far as protection of privacy is concerned.
This bill is full of loopholes. It leaves many sectors without any protection. This bill is filled with ifs and whens and shoulds. This means the government says to large businesses they should, if possible, be concerned with the privacy of their clients. I insist on the word should because this is exactly what we have in this bill.
This situation is unacceptable. First of all, I would like to stress the fundamental nature of the right to privacy. Others have spoken of this before me, but I am returning to it because, with this bill, the Liberal Party is putting the right to make a profit before the right to privacy.
The experts equate the right to privacy with other human rights such as the right to equality and justice. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations 50 years ago and to which Canada was a signatory, states that everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person. It also states as follows:
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation.
In Canada, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms also impacts on the protection of privacy, even though this is not specifically in the charter. In Quebec, as members are aware, this right to privacy is explicitly recognized in the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, which was enacted in 1975. There is nothing ambiguous about section 5, which says, and I quote:
- Every person has a right to the respect of his or her privacy.
This right is also recognized in Quebec's Civil Code, and my colleague from Beauharnois—Salaberry, who is very knowledgeable in the law, can tell us that I am right. This right is indeed recognized in chapter III of Quebec's Civil Code entitled “Respect of Reputation and Privacy”, and I quote:
- Every person has a right to the respect of his reputation and privacy. No one may invade the privacy of a person without the consent of the person or his heirs unless authorized by law.
It is crystal clear: respect of privacy is a fundamental right that is recognized internationally, as well as in Canada and in Quebec. It is wrong for the federal government to introduce a bill that does not protect this fundamental right.
As mentioned in the article published this morning in Le Devoir , the situation in Quebec in this regard is particularly exemplary. The Government of Quebec is the only government in North America that has passed legislation protecting personal information in the public and private sectors.
Furthermore, many experts say that Quebec's law, which applies to the private sector, is one of the best in the world. It is a lot better than the federal bill that applies to the public sector only.
It is surprising in this context that the government did not draw on Quebec's legislation. It would have achieved two objectives at once. First of all it would have ensured consumers would have top-notch protection. It would also have avoided all the inevitable loopholes and pitfalls of unharmonized federal and provincial legislation.
This leads us to believe that the real objective of this bill is not the protection of privacy, but a vague exercise in public relations. The government would like to use this bill to show that it responds to the public's concerns. This, however, is totally false.
The bill does not meet the expectations of the people of Quebec who want their privacy protected. Instead, it serves commercial interests.
Even Canada's privacy commissioner notes that the working document proposed by Industry Canada and the Department of Justice focuses more on commerce than on protecting privacy.
In conclusion, one simply needs to compare the titles of the two acts. Quebec's act is entitled “An Act respecting the protection of personal information in the private sector”, whereas the convoluted title of the federal act reads as follows:
An Act to support and promote electronic commerce by protecting personal information that is collected, used or disclosed in certain circumstances—
The Quebec act is clearly more strict and more comprehensive, in terms of its format, definitions, clarity and because of the power of order given to the commissioner. It is for these reasons that we categorically reject Bill C-54.
The federal government refused to follow the example of the Quebec act, even though it is recognized as a model in this area. This does not come as a surprise, because Quebec's act is aimed primarily at protecting citizens, whereas the federal government's bill is essentially intended to please big corporations.