Madam Speaker, I am pleased to take part in this debate along with my Bloc Quebecois colleagues.
To start with, I would like to thank my colleague from Mercier, who vehemently condemned this bill, which is a direct encroachment on Quebec's privacy act, an act unanimously hailed as a model.
Bill C-54 is aimed at promoting e-commerce, but sadly it also infringes on the right to privacy, as explained by my colleague.
The Bloc Quebecois is against this bill and asks that it be withdrawn for five reasons. First, because the Minister of Industry introduced it without previously consulting the provinces. He went through the motions, telling everybody “Have a look at it and we will get together”. One week later he hastily introduced his bill, saying it had to go through.
We know why every bill must be passed quickly. It is because every bill is highly centralizing. The government wants to grab all of the provinces' powers, be that on privacy or, as we saw this week, the environment. The federal government wants all of the powers because it needs to position itself within the World Trade Organization, in view of what is coming down the pike with supergovernments. It wants to play the role of a country with all of the powers, one in which the provinces will be mere regions.
Nobody was consulted on this bill, and yet it was introduced. The Minister of Industry introduced this bill without consulting the provinces. There was no consultation whatsoever.
We are asking that this legislation be withdrawn because it infringes upon provincial jurisdiction, because it is a step backward for Quebecers in the protection of personal information, because its implementation in Quebec will create confusion, and because it is flawed from a legal point of view.
The Bloc Quebecois is not the only one to say that. The Chambre des notaires du Québec came to tell the committee. The Québec Interprofessional Council also came to tell the committee, as did the Barreau du Québec, the Quebec government and the Conseil du patronat du Québec. Incidentally, that organization is not pro-sovereignist, as far as we know. They told the committee that the bill had too many flaws from a constitutional, democratic and legal point of view, and also with regard to the protection of personal information.
The bill is almost unworkable, it lacks clarity, creates unnecessary problems for Quebec businesses and significantly impedes the right of Quebecers to the protection of their personal information.
Given what I just said, it would be unacceptable for government members to support such legislation.
Quebec has its own charter of human rights and freedoms, which was enacted in 1975. The Quebec government also passed, in 1994, an act respecting the protection of personal information in the private sector, which is unique in America. That legislation is recognized as a model all over the world. The federal government should use it as a source of inspiration to draft its own legislation.
But no. Because it wants to have all of the powers and take credit for it, the government is trying to pass this bill as quickly as possible, so that no one will notice. Quebecers and Canadians are not stupid. They can clearly see the government's intention. They know what it wants to do with this bill.
I am going to try to show that this minister did not consult the provinces, that he acted unilaterally in tabling this bill.
On June 12, 1998 the ministers responsible for the information highway met in Fredericton and agreed to consult each other, when appropriate, when contemplating legislation with respect to the protection of personal information in the private sector.
On September 21, 1998 the federal Minister of Industry sent a copy of proposed legislation to his provincial counterparts, asking for their comments. Oddly, though, on October 1, 1998, without even waiting to hear from them, the Minister of Industry tabled his bill in the House of Commons.
In addition, as I mentioned earlier, this bill interferes in provincial jurisdiction. The Minister of Industry is now creating a constitutional dispute that could have been averted if he had agreed to work together with his counterparts.
Under the powers vested in them by the Constitution of 1867 with respect to property and civil rights, the provinces have jurisdiction with respect to personal information. All of the experts consulted by the Bloc Quebecois see this as provincial jurisdiction.
However, Bill C-54 provides that the legislation will apply to the commercial operations of organizations under federal jurisdiction; to organizations that transfer personal information from one province to another or one country to another, and to employees about whom personal information is collected by an enterprise under federal jurisdiction.
In addition, under clause 30(1) the federal legislation will apply to private organizations even if they come under provincial jurisdiction if, in the view of the federal government, the province does not have similar legislation. This is ridiculous. The result will be complete havoc.
The proposed legislation is unenforceable, interferes directly in provincial areas of jurisdiction, and is unconstitutional. The provinces' consent was not sought. It is interference in their jurisdiction, and Quebec is being forced to take a step backward with respect to the protection of personal information.
Under the Quebec law an individual with a grievance may apply free of charge to the access to information commission, which will first try to mediate between the two parties involved. If this fails, it will investigate and make a decision or an order which would be binding. In this case, recourse is simple and effective.
Conversely, the provisions on recourse in Bill C-54 are more complex. An individual with a grievance must first try to reach agreement with the organization. If this person is dissatisfied, he may ask the federal privacy commissioner to intervene, and the commissioner can make recommendations only. After this, a dissatisfied individual may seek reparation from the federal court.
How many people can afford to seek reparation in the federal court? This is totally crazy.
The Quebec law provides that an organization must inform an individual of the use to be made of the personal information gathered. Bill C-54 simply provides that people gathering personal information should be able to explain the use intended for this information.
This bill, in Quebec, will create confusion because it is weak from a legal standpoint, because the heart of the bill is appended, because Bill C-54 gives cabinet discretionary power to decide the value of provincial law and its application and, finally, because it will invade provincial jurisdiction within three years of its proclamation unless the province adopts similar legislation.
I repeat, the government tabled this bill without consulting the provinces. It is encroaching on provincial jurisdiction and forcing Quebec to take a step backward in the area of the protection of personal information.
Its application in Quebec will create confusion, and the bill is lacking in legal terms. It is unworkable, unclear, creates unnecessary problems for Quebec businesses and significantly reduces Quebecers' right to the protection of their personal information.
I urge my colleagues in this House to vote against the bill.