Information & Ethics committee  It was decided that it was not personal information.

Information & Ethics committee  As I said, it's always easier to define things in a particular fact context. You mentioned that this issue came up again and again. It doesn't come up very often in our complaints. I don't know how many complaints we've had that would deal with that--perhaps a handful. This is not an issue that dominates our complaints.

Information & Ethics committee  It's at the time the information is generated with the organizations that it's qualified. It's the circumstance in which it's generated that leads to the definition. Afterwards, for example, it may be anonymized, and then it isn't personal information for various points. We'll come up with an example, Mr.

Information & Ethics committee  You're right that the ombudsman's conclusions are not binding on Federal Court. Certainly as an ombudsman one has a certain amount of latitude in conclusions, but as I think one of the honourable members said, it's always a good idea to provide predictability. We try as much as possible to provide a continuous line of reasoning in our conclusions.

Information & Ethics committee  In the medical field?

Information & Ethics committee  Well, personal information in medical records, let's say, would be the contents of my file, the medical details about me: my state of health, the results of my latest tests, things like these. This is all personal information related to me. In the case where the Privacy Commissioner decided that some alleged personal information was in fact a work product, as I remember it had to with the prescribing patterns of doctors.

Information & Ethics committee  Yes. Perhaps it's the same issue the assistant commissioner was giving some examples of. We then may require of those companies that may be sending your information outside the country that they hold those to whom they are sending it to Canadian standards so that this would not affect you in any more negative a way than were it completely treated in Canada.

Information & Ethics committee  No, we don't have inspectors. We have auditors—

Information & Ethics committee  —but we have to have reasonable grounds to believe there's a problem; we have to have noticed something. We have two cases in which we've sent in our auditors, but this was not small business, I may say.

Information & Ethics committee  That has to do with being able to share personal information in the case of a sale. Is that what you're referring to?

Information & Ethics committee  No. This is the hook and this is the interesting part of it. Through this mechanism, we have jurisdiction over the Canadian companies because it has a presence or a real and substantial link as the legal test in Canada. As you know, in the privacy world there are some countries that say their legislation has an extra-territorial reach, and on the other hand, Canadian law doesn't usually run except in Canada, and so on.

Information & Ethics committee  Yes. Could I ask the assistant commissioner to speak to the research that was done a couple of years ago?

Information & Ethics committee  That's correct. I think I have broad enough powers. I haven't had the time... I haven't been commissioner for a long time, and you know that the first years of my term were devoted to restoring the office, but I have very great powers under this act. Give me a little more time to exercise them, and you'll see in five years whether that was effective or not.

Information & Ethics committee  Yes. The law is flexible. It's a fairly light law, but if there is a complaint, we investigate that complaint until there is a settlement or we say it's not founded. We're not letting people at this point just.... We're not saying it's well founded and then walking away. Sometimes I read that the Privacy Commissioner said something is well founded, and then nothing happens.

Information & Ethics committee  That's right.