SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 136

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 28, 2022 11:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 136 - Nov/28/22
Mr. Ryan Williams (Bay of Quinte, CPC)
  • Nov/28/22 1:53:50 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, the member talked about being in the driver's seat, about AI and privacy. The bill is really a balance between business interests and privacy, but one thing that we have seen is missing from the bill is its failure to mention privacy as a fundamental human right. That is not included in the purpose clause. We look at other provinces, like Quebec, and Quebec has privacy listed as a fundamental human right in its privacy legislation. To be in control, to be in the driver's seat, to protect our minors, to ensure that businesses do not have something like legitimate interests that take control of this bill, does the member agree that having privacy listed as a fundamental human right is imperative to this bill going forward in the purpose statement?
135 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 136 - Nov/28/22
Mr. Ryan Williams (Bay of Quinte, CPC)
  • Nov/28/22 4:03:37 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, my colleague talked about the tribunal aspect. It is very important that, in this bill, when it comes to privacy protection, besides the Privacy Commissioner, we would have another element of a tribunal. Most importantly, out of that process, there would still be the Federal Court. When it comes to citizens having their data breached, and the whole premise of this bill is to protect that of citizens, children and adults alike, there is still going be a tribunal added. Is there any other jurisdiction that is using a tribunal? If not, why does the member think it is included in this bill?
105 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 136 - Nov/28/22
Mr. Ryan Williams (Bay of Quinte, CPC)
  • Nov/28/22 5:21:18 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, I know it is very important, when we look at different aspects of the bill, for it to be balanced, as the member has mentioned, between business, ethics and consumer protection. We believe in privacy as a fundamental human right. One of the definitions he talked about was de-identification versus anonymization. De-identification was used in ethics. We studied the Telus data for good program, whereby data was just given from Telus to consumers to the government during COVID. De-identification means that the risk of the individual being identified remains, whereas anonymization means that information is scrapped. Can the member comment on whether he sees anonymization being used more than de-identification?
116 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border