Industry committee  Mr. Chair, that's where the second portion of the “Authorized representatives” kicks in: The rights and recourses provided under this Act may be exercised (b) on behalf of an individual, other than a minor, under a legal incapacity by a person authorized by law to administer

Industry committee  I think the committee heard from a number of representatives. Fourteen was requested by a number of industry stakeholders. I think you've heard some testimony and some considerations from us as officials that the 15- to 18-year-old area still contains a lot of potentially sensiti

Industry committee  At this time, no federal legislation defines the age of minority or majority. The only age defined is the voting age, which is set at 18. However, that has nothing to do with the concept of majority. Bill C‑63 on harmful content online is currently proposing that the age of majo

Industry committee  Mr. Chair, I want to thank the member for the question. I think it would be important to return to page 6 of the bill and clause 4 on “Authorized representatives”, where it clearly notes: The rights and recourses provided under this Act may be exercised —and then with the mo

Industry committee  Essentially what would have to happen is that, first of all, an individual would be looking to actually direct the relationship of their data. By and large, what we're talking about here is recourse and rights. Let's imagine that it was the right to deletion or the right for data

Industry committee  Again, I would just go back to the “Authorized representatives” piece, where the rights and recourses of the act are afforded “on behalf of a minor by a parent, guardian or tutor, unless the minor wishes....” In your case, if those 17-year-olds had sought out their own autonomous

Industry committee  The only time that might arise is when the commercial entity holding this information receives a request or, potentially, has instructions given on the treatment of the personal information, and they themselves, potentially, get conflicting instructions. Let's imagine that some

Industry committee  I would point to two things that I think are important. One is that under this definition of “minor”, minors' information under the act, as we've now identified through the amendments, will be defined as “sensitive” information, which means that it requires a duty of care and a g

Industry committee  Thank you for that question. As a Manitoban who had the unlucky fate of turning 18 and then immediately moving to the province of Ontario for university, where there was a different understanding of what competency was as it related to the consumption of libations, I feel this

Industry committee  Spencer is a three-part test where any satisfaction of one of the tests can constitute lawful authority for the disclosure of the information. One, is it an emergency? Is it exigent circumstances? Is this information absolutely dire so that it needs to be accessed in this moment?

Industry committee  It reads: Administering law—request of government institution An organization may disclose an individual's personal information without their knowledge or consent to a government institution or part of a government institution that has made a request for the information, ide

Industry committee  What proposed section 44 does in the government amendment is to say that for law enforcement in these particular zones, you can't rely on the CPPA itself for a definition of lawful authority. When we're suggesting that you can rely on a reasonable law to be able to have lawful ac

Industry committee  It's called “Communication with next of kin or authorized representative”.

Industry committee  I think the case law is now what guides organizations in how they use personal information. However, adding this kind of definition to the act would, in a way, further confirm the test set forth in Spencer.

Industry committee  As Ms. Angus said, the addition of a new definition that includes, in a single sentence, the three criteria of the test established in Spencer, without stating that they are three separate parts but only one has to be satisfied, creates a new, more restrictive test for organizati