Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 661-675 of 902
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Information & Ethics committee  Then I think that would be it.

November 27th, 2006Committee meeting

Jennifer Stoddart

Information & Ethics committee  Yes, it's a fundamental issue.

November 27th, 2006Committee meeting

Jennifer Stoddart

Information & Ethics committee  It is, but the first level of court agreed with us, so it's not patently unreasonable.

November 27th, 2006Committee meeting

Jennifer Stoddart

Information & Ethics committee  Well, we may take it to a third level.

November 27th, 2006Committee meeting

Jennifer Stoddart

Information & Ethics committee  Yes, Mr. Chairman, that's what we're saying, and we do in the Privacy Act.

November 27th, 2006Committee meeting

Jennifer Stoddart

Information & Ethics committee  Yes. We're saying that in the course of our investigations we have to be able to look at all the documents that are relevant to our investigation.

November 27th, 2006Committee meeting

Jennifer Stoddart

Information & Ethics committee  I think they already are, Mr. Chairman. We'll worry about that later.

November 27th, 2006Committee meeting

Jennifer Stoddart

Information & Ethics committee  No. Mr. Chairman, that is correct. The honourable member has exactly stated what our position is. We raise it, but our preference is that we leave PIPEDA as it is. I believe this issue was looked at in 2000. It is a flexible definition. In some of the decisions made by the Privacy Commissioner we have dealt with the issue of work product and decided that in very obvious situations it is not covered by the act, but in situations where the information is of a more personal type, more of a revealing type, the act could cover it.

November 27th, 2006Committee meeting

Jennifer Stoddart

November 27th, 2006Committee meeting

Jennifer Stoddart

Information & Ethics committee  My recollection of that case that went to the Federal Court was that it was discontinued. It didn't really decide the issue. I think that's something for this committee to decide.

November 27th, 2006Committee meeting

Jennifer Stoddart

Information & Ethics committee  Well, there are several things that can be done. First of all, in the example the honourable member gave, I believe that is your health information that you would have given to the Manitoba government. So the Manitoba government can issue guidelines—it may have, like the federal government—and suggest that there is a scale of sensitivity.

November 27th, 2006Committee meeting

Jennifer Stoddart

November 27th, 2006Committee meeting

Jennifer Stoddart

Information & Ethics committee  No, that's not provided for in the act. Perhaps at the time there hadn't been enough leaks from large data bases for anyone to think it was a problem. Yes, we're in favour of the principle. The problem is in knowing how to implement it.

November 27th, 2006Committee meeting

Jennifer Stoddart

Information & Ethics committee  We considered a number of American examples. That's one thing we should look at with government lawyers because it's quite complex. To whom do you give notice? What would be the scope of it? Would it concern all the information, or only where there's a significant risk? Who will bear the cost of that?

November 27th, 2006Committee meeting

Jennifer Stoddart

Information & Ethics committee  Yes, Mr. Chairman.

November 27th, 2006Committee meeting

Jennifer Stoddart