moved:
Motion No. 3
That Bill C-3, in Clause 5, be amended by replacing lines 30 to 33 on page 2 with the following:
“(2) The Commissioner shall ensure that the National DNA Data Bank Authority maintains a record of every person who accesses the national DNA data bank established under subsection (1) and any DNA profile contained in that bank.”
Motion No. 5
That Bill C-3, in Clause 9, be amended by adding after line 34 on page 6 the following:
“9.1 (1) The Privacy Commissioner shall every three years after the coming into force of section 5, carry out a complete investigation in respect of the National DNA Data Bank established under that section to ensure compliance with any provision of this Act in respect of that bank.
(2) Section 37 of the Privacy Act applies, where appropriate and with such modification as the circumstances require in respect of an investigation carried out under subsection (1).”
Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to speak today in this House to this important bill, which has required a lot of attention and a lot of work. It concerns fundamental issues in a free and democratic society.
Motion No. 1 is very simple. It aims to include criteria, a set of principles in the preamble to the bill. We must not lose sight of the function of DNA. It can be used to identify not only an individual, but his family as well. We can identify parents, find out about them, children and brothers and sisters. It is something very private. There is nothing more personal than a person's DNA.
The purpose of Motion No. 1 is very simple. It provides principles or yardsticks according to which the bill must be applied. Among other things, it states that DNA profiles may be used only for purposes of identification, and not for any other purpose. There are a number of things that can be done with DNA already, and more will be possible as the technology progresses.
We wish to avoid the improper use and disclosure of DNA profiles, for the same reason, to avoid the wrongful use of a very powerful technology.
Before passing this bill, let us set up principles for now and for the future, because it will have repercussions not just for now but also later on. As the technology evolves, the principles will be more and more defined, but the more that can be defined today the better. This is very important. So that was Motion No. 1.
Motion No. 3 is equally important. The bill was discussed in committee for hours. The motion is intended to strike a balance between protecting society, fighting crime, and protecting privacy. Let us keep in mind that these are two fundamental principles in our society, and that a balance must be struck.
Motion No. 3 concerns clause 5. It states as follows:
“(2) The Commissioner shall ensure that the National DNA Data Bank Authority maintains a record of every person who accesses the national DNA data bank established under subsection (1) and any DNA profile contained in that bank”.
This is to prevent people from consulting the bank for a just any reason, and consultations will be recorded. Abuse can be avoided by having knowledge of who consults the bank, for which individual, and how. People will hesitate to consult the bank needlessly, knowing that records are being kept.
I will now read Motion No. 5, because it is just as important:
“9.1(1) The Privacy Commissioner shall every three years after the coming into force of section 5, carry out a complete investigation in respect of the National DNA Data Bank established under that section—”
In Canada, there is a government agency called the office of the privacy commissioner, whose role is to ensure that people's privacy is respected. Therefore, why not give that government agency the power to see if the national DNA data bank is fulfilling its mandate, respecting people's privacy, and not being misused?
Keeping track of any consultation would allow the Privacy Commissioner to look at the file, to see if there were too many consultations or if these consultations were unjustified, for what reasons, and so on. In such cases, the Privacy Commissioner would have the authority to impose sanctions on those who do not respect privacy which, as we know, is an essential value in any democratic and free society.
This is what I had to say on Motions Nos. 1, 3 and 5 in Group No.1.