Industry committee  I would like to add that solicitation or communication with people in your riding is totally legal. This does not affect political activities, fundraising, in other words, asking for money. It only affects the sale of products or the offer of services, which is part of the commer

Industry committee  Precisely. Some of our considerations were prompted by the Canadian Bar Association, which suggested some small changes. After due consideration, we made these changes, but they are very minor and very technical.

Industry committee  The subject matter is covered now in subclauses 10.(2.1) and 10.(2.2), where really we've elaborated in the interior of that consent regime instances when enhanced information is required prior to the installation of software on a computer. It serves much the same function of dis

Industry committee  You're not reading it incorrectly. But the amendment has nothing to do with that. The amendment does not change the underlying provisions of either the Competition Act or ECPA. It simply clarifies what was perhaps not initially obvious. We were concerned to make it clear, both fo

Industry committee  The provision is not a doubling-up. The clause essentially functions the same way that it did as introduced. We consider the amendments to be technical rather than of a policy nature. The private right of action in this case for violations of PIPEDA and the Competition Act are al

Industry committee  Not really. We are well aware of the fact that technological convergence is happening more quickly and that it is impossible to really differentiate technologically between the telephone and email communication. From a technological standpoint, they are identical. So there is al

Industry committee  I think it's difficult to cast in words easily, but one of the issues is simply that the Telecommunications Act is perhaps not the best place to have this kind of regime, in any event. When you look at the “do not call” list today, it is a somewhat awkward fit with the Telecommun

Industry committee  In the regulations....

Industry committee  It is my sense that the minister would be very reluctant to impose measures that would give rise to such costs without first holding extensive consultations. That is practically a standard requirement today.

Industry committee  No doubt. That is why extensive consultations will certainly be held before the provisions are enacted. That is necessary. In fact, we could not even enact the provisions if the regulations were not in place. As you know, there are certain requirements involved, such as public co

Industry committee  Ministers are very sensitive to public opinion.

Industry committee  Yes.

Industry committee  No, it is not in Bill C-27. But based on our knowledge of other legislation, we can assure the committee that consultations on the necessary regulations will take place before the provisions come into force, prior to the transition.

Industry committee  It is not really a matter of doing away with it. Rather we just want to have the ability to replace this regulatory regime in the years ahead, if need be. Technology-wise, there are already some inconsistencies between the National Do Not Call List and the corresponding legislati

Industry committee  We tried to find a technological difference between the National Do Not Call List and what is in Bill C-27, the provisions dealing with spam and others. In the end, it was impossible to separate the two. In light of developments such as Voice Over Internet Protocol, we were fully