SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 136

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 28, 2022 11:00AM
  • Nov/28/22 3:57:16 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, I was fascinated by the part of the bill dealing with artificial intelligence. Personally, I thought that it proposed a general framework and the beginnings of a legal structure that were very interesting. The objective is to regulate pan-Canadian, interprovincial and other trade, as well as to prohibit certain practices. Does my colleague agree with me on that, at least? It is an important step forward in a sector like artificial intelligence, which is so murky and so amazing at the same time.
86 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/28/22 5:38:55 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my hon. colleague from Abitibi—Témiscamingue, whom I commend for his hard work. Today, I am pleased to speak to a bill that is as necessary as it is complex. As written, the bill has some grey areas, some things the Bloc Québécois has reservations about, but we do think it has a lot of potential. Bill C‑27 enacts the consumer privacy protection act. Sponsored by the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, the member for Saint-Maurice—Champlain, the bill is at second reading. It would create three different acts: the consumer privacy protection act, the personal information and data protection tribunal act, and the artificial intelligence and data act. That last one is very interesting. In essence, Bill C‑27 seeks to strengthen the protection of anonymity and privacy. Now that digital technology is omnipresent in our lives, it is harder than ever to make sure our privacy and personal information are protected. Until now, organizations of every kind have taken advantage of the absence of a legal consumer protection framework. In Canada, personal information is a commodity without a legal owner. Just look at the Cambridge Analytica scandal during the 2016 U.S. election. Bill C‑27 aims to change this sorry state of affairs, which is threatening our democracy, our privacy and social peace. The bill not only limits and restricts the excessive freedom enjoyed by organizations that collect and share our data, but it also gives them responsibilities. In short, it puts the individual and the idea of consent back at the centre of reflections on digital exchanges, and that is significant. The Bloc Québécois supports this bill because it partially fills a legal void in Canada. I say “in Canada” because the Quebec National Assembly passed Law 25 on the protection of personal information way back in September 2021. It is a well-written law. Bill C‑27 is actually largely modelled after it, and we are very proud of that. Given that the protection of personal information is a shared jurisdiction, it is vital to the Bloc Québécois that Bill C‑27 not take precedence over Quebec law. This does not seem to be the case at this time, but it will be up to the committee to verify this and ensure that it does not. Speaking of the committee stage, many grey areas still need to be clarified. According to Daniel Therrien, a former privacy commissioner of Canada, Bill C-27 is too timid in its current form. I myself have thought of something that could be studied at the committee stage, and that is image copyright. Since we are speaking about consent, the protection of anonymity, personal data and the need to adapt our legal framework to the digital era, I believe that it would be highly relevant to address this subject. Just like the digital world, the world of photography has changed a great deal over the past 20 years. Thanks to smartphones, and the fact that just about everybody owns one, or even two, more and more photos are being taken. According to some estimates, more than three billion photographs are taken every day around the world. An image is a form of personal information. The use and sharing of images are intrinsically linked to the principle of consent. If no consent is obtained, that is a breach of privacy. I believe that our current interpretation of image copyright is too strict, and this is detrimental to street photography and photojournalism. My father, Antoine Desilets, a photojournalist, was also a street photographer in his own way. Street photography is generally defined as photography done outdoors whose main subjects are people in spontaneous situations and in public places such as streets, parks, beaches and protests. A good example of this kind of photography is the famous photograph The Kiss by the Hôtel de Ville, taken by the renowned French photographer Robert Doisneau. That shot has actually been the subject of multiple lawsuits, with every Dick and Jane claiming to be one of the two main figures in the picture. Let me tell a little story from closer to home. In 1987, a Quebec photographer and friend by the name of Gilbert Duclos took a picture of a woman in the street. After the photograph was published in a magazine, the woman decided to sue Gilbert Duclos. She claimed that she was being mocked by her friends and felt that she had been wronged. After a two-year legal saga that reached the Supreme Court, the woman won. For more than three decades, that decision, known as the Duclos decision, has been a precedent. The debate was recently reignited by the case of a veiled woman and her husband who were photographed at a flea market in Sainte‑Foy. Since the photograph had been published without their consent, the photographer was forced to pay $3,500 to each of the two people in the photograph, even though the individuals were veiled. There is no doubt that the Duclos decision was used to bolster the plaintiffs' case. Today, it is very easy to take a photographer to court and win. This means that many photojournalists and street photographers get sued, so unfortunately, they have to practise a form of self-censorship to protect themselves and the newspapers they work for. I believe this self-censorship has grave consequences for the arts, journalism and archive building. As it happens, on October 1, a group of 12 street photographers, led by the esteemed Jean Lauzon, published a book entitled Le droit à l'image as a commentary on this very issue. The Bloc Québécois believes that the committee that will study Bill C-27 will have to take its time and question all the experts it needs to consult in order to come up with an ironclad law. I have a suggestion. Since we are discussing consent, privacy, the right to anonymity and personal data in the digital age, why not invite experts such as Jean Lauzon to help us understand how to modernize image copyright? Also, when does an image of an individual taken in a public space become private? Once again, there is the need for oral or written consent on the one hand, and perhaps the definition of the concept of a subject on the other. There is a whole host of factors to consider. For the rest, I am in favour of Bill C‑27 because it gives hope that we are going to begin to plug the gaping hole that our data is currently circulating in, allowing it to be sold and exploited. It will be especially important to ensure that the Quebec legislation takes precedence over the Canadian legislation, as is customary in matters of shared jurisdiction.
1176 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/28/22 5:48:49 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Mr. Speaker, that is a very important question. The Quebec legislation does not go quite that far, but the issue remains. The jurisprudence dates back to 1987, after all. When my colleague refers to photos taken in public, the definition of the words “public” and “private” is not clear. I might be in the street kissing my mistress. That is my private life, but at a location that, within the meaning of the current federal legislation, is a public place. There is a host of concepts of the kind that ought to be delineated and more precisely defined in order to bring some much-needed clarity to the whole issue. It is really too bad that Mr. Duclos is still burdened by this jurisprudence.
128 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/28/22 5:50:16 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Mr. Speaker, our colleague is always full of surprises. Basically, I think this bill is relevant. Overall, it is relevant. In this day and age and in light of the current context, this bill is pretty much a necessity. I am concerned about how the bill will be dealt with in committee. When it comes to bills like this one, the committee has an extremely important role to play. Beyond the wording of the bill, it is the work that is done in committee that will be critical for the future.
91 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/28/22 5:51:51 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Mr. Speaker, there will be more to come on that. In the case of photographs, it is not easy to define what implied consent involves. In some situations, implied consent from the subject may be a look that says that they consent. It may also involve asking the subject if they agree to be photographed. In other cases, it may involve written consent. That is why I think it is extremely important and relevant for the committee to do an exemplary job, and not just with regard to photography, which is part of who I am. In order to do that, the committee needs to invite all kinds of experts.
110 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border