Public Safety committee  Thank you. I think you hit on the key, transparency. It's not a matter of one being more or less important than the other. They all have to be present for the legislation to be reasonable, fair and balanced, and for it to deserve the public's trust. They all have to be incorpor

Public Safety committee  The premise of the legislation is important, but there's an old saying: “You can't lose fast enough.” I think it's incumbent on us all to take the time and do it right—not do it over or have people suffer as a result of legislation that could have been done right in the first ins

Public Safety committee  Yes, but who's going to create that list, and what are their motives?

Public Safety committee  I think as it is now and actually as the critical infrastructure categories were defined just after September 11, anything could be construed to fall under one or more of those categories. They are very broad and not really very well defined. Anything has economic value. Many t

Public Safety committee  Certainly. From our understanding, the legislation allows for anybody to be appointed as an inspector. That person would have the power to enter any premises, short of a residence, without a warrant. They can seize anything. There is no limit. There's no requirement that it be r

Public Safety committee  The short answer is yes. It needs to be there.

Public Safety committee  To suggest “do a thing that is specified in the order”, we could hope that this would limit it. Unfortunately, in my experience and in discussions with law enforcement, with members of the bar and bench and, frankly, some of your colleagues, they admit they don't get it. They don

Public Safety committee  Thank you very much. Thank you for inviting me to appear on behalf of the Privacy and Access Council of Canada, an independent, non-profit, non-partisan organization that is not funded by government or industry. Our members, like everybody in this room and the rest of us who u

Information & Ethics committee  Yes, but I would challenge you on your reference to “a reverse onus on the corporation”. No, it's an obligation they already face under legislation. Make them comply.

Information & Ethics committee  Yes, reverse it. Thank you.

Information & Ethics committee  That's right. They monetize our information. They should be the ones to prove that what they are foisting upon an unaware and unsuspecting public is safe and is not going to undermine privacy, security and national security.

Information & Ethics committee  One of the things we see in existing Canadian and foreign legislation is consent that has no granularity. You have to consent to the organization collecting information from you and about you. It'll be shared with its business partners and affiliates. You don't know who those are

Information & Ethics committee  I'd be happy to send more information. I'm working with colleagues who are developing an international standard and a facility to do just what I've been describing. It turns it around, puts us in the driver's seat and compels organizations to comply with legislation. That's impo

Information & Ethics committee  Go at it with both prongs, so that the organizations have to comply. Think of it as what Ralph Nader did long ago with the auto industry. Some people called it public shaming. If you don't know how an organization is complying, whether it's complying or to what extent it's compl

Information & Ethics committee  Make it so that it has to publicly fess up.