Madam Speaker, I am really pleased to speak to this issue because it so happens that I spent most of my career working in the field of computer science and I know these things.
When Quebec was preparing its legislation on the protection of personal information in the private sector, I even had the opportunity to appear before the commission that held hearings on that subject in Quebec. Therefore, I am very comfortable talking about this issue.
First of all, let us see what this bill does and what it does not do.
Here, today, I heard comments that led me to believe that some members do not clearly see the limits of this bill. It is aimed at promoting electronic commerce, as stated in the title.
However, in promoting electronic commerce, it also deals with the protection of personal information in commercial transactions. It must be understood that all personal information that is not related to a commercial transaction is not protected under the bill before us.
It must also be understood that this bill simply does not apply to any foreign transaction, commercial or other. A few moments ago, our colleague from the Reform Party told us about his clock that does not have to be set. Since the transaction was made with an American company, the bill simply does not apply. This bill does not apply to transactions made outside the country, only to the ones made within Canada's borders.
This being said, the bill does not apply either to the protection of information on health or on any other activity that we may enter into, unless it involves a business transaction. This bill will not apply to government information either. However, we will see later that the government will have all powers to access our personal information, even of a commercial nature.
In fact, this bill has three major flaws. The first one is that, since its purpose is to promote e-commerce, it does not offer real protection for personal information. It is clear from the bill that there is no obligation on the part of businesses to let clients know how they will use the information they collect.
There is no easy recourse for the consumer or the owner of that personal information, you, me, or anybody for that matter. It will not be easy for anybody to find out who has what information, to check if the information is exact and to have the records amended if it is not.
When they talk about a law that will put us on an equal footing with the European Union, I consider, frankly, that the bill introduced by the Minister of Industry leaves a lot to be desired. It is quite weak compared to the legislation passed in Quebec five years ago.
That is why we in the Bloc Quebecois are so concerned. This federal legislation will conflict with Quebec legislation, which is sound and well put together, and will destroy the benefits people in Quebec have been enjoying for five years.
The first problem with this legislation is that it is incomplete. It does not really protect personal information. It certainly does not protect the individual who could be wronged by the use of that information, however accurate or wrong the information be.
The second problem with this legislation is that it conflicts directly with Quebec legislation. Commerce, among other things, comes under the Civil Code. The Civil Code of Quebec is different from the legal system in the rest of Canada. Thus, commerce is a prerogative covered by Quebec legislation and the bill before us is in conflict with it.
So much so that, as some of my colleagues have pointed out, it must be expected that constitutional challenges will be launched by corporations and individuals who will feel wronged by the situation.
If I had advice to give to law students, I would tell them to undertake some research, a thesis or a master's degree on Bill C-54. Then they could rest assured of collecting good fees for many years. This will be a real gold mine, quite literally a Klondike for lawyers, unless of course the House and the minister change their minds and the bill is never passed.
This is my fondest wish. This would save a lot of people a lot of money. It would provide much better protection for Quebecers' interests and the Quebec legislation might even apply throughout Canada, which would be good protection for Canadians who deserve to be treated as well as Quebecers.
This bill will create an unbearable situation for Quebec businesses. Let us suppose I run a business. My transactions will now be subject to two acts, the Quebec act, according to which I have to do this or that, and the federal act, which says something else. If the two acts do not conflict with each other, I will still have to multiply my efforts, which will cost me money and time, but I will be able to abide by both pieces of legislation.
However, when the two acts conflict with each other, and there will be such instances, I will have to choose between breaking the Quebec law or breaking the federal law.
The House and the Minister of Industry have no right to create such a dilemma for businesses; namely, to decide which law to obey. This is unacceptable.
By acting without consulting the provinces, and Quebec in particular, the Minister of Industry failed to carry out his duty to ensure that taxpayers, businesses and individuals are not placed in a situation where they have to choose between one act and another without knowing which one must prevail.
This is why I can assure members that there are people who, in such circumstances, will go all the way to the supreme court to get a clear answer. What will be the outcome? Since the Constitution states clearly that those issues are under provincial jurisdiction, the Supreme Court of Canada will disallow the industry minister's bill, which will have been nothing but a loss of valuable time.
I said that there are three problems here. The third one came to my attention this afternoon when I was going through my notes and a few documents, some of which are from the Library of Parliament. I had not realized up to now how extensive the government's power to collect personal information from businesses will be.
Big brother is looming. Listen to this. The first amendment moved by the minister will allow an organization to disclose personal information to a government institution or part of a government institution that has made a request for the information, indicated its lawful authority to obtain the information and its suspicions.
Members will remember that, not too long ago, Canada Customs gave the Department of Human Resources Development a copy of its tapes so that the department could go on a fishing expedition to identify people who went abroad while receiving EI benefits, and have them pay back those benefits. That is what we are facing with this bill.
The impact could be enormous. If the government now has the right to ask businesses for information, to sort and collate data, then no one can hide from the watchful eye of the government any longer.
For all these reasons the Bloc Quebecois will vote against this bill, while hoping that it will die on the order paper.