Senator McPhedran: As a point of clarification, Senator Plett, how do we regulate this when you give a specific example about an acceptable limit of physical contact or physical punishment that happens in the privacy of a home or other location where the recipient of those two slaps, for example, has no power, no voice and no way of getting beyond that private situation?

Senator Housakos: Can you please tell the chamber what data you have? What evidence is there that members of any political party have found intrusions or misuse of their data? Where is the evidence that there has been abuse? Have there been formal complaints? Have there been numerous complaints? Have complaints been filed with the Privacy Commissioner?

As much as your speech was interesting, what are the remedies you’re proposing? From my understanding of the speech and given the fact it’s dealing with Bill C-47, there are no remedies. Am I wrong?

Senator C. Deacon: In terms of the evidence of intrusions or complaints, the Privacy Commissioner made it clear he has no jurisdiction here. He has no legal authority to engage. That’s a problem.

I look at it and say I don’t understand the reasons why political parties don’t see it appropriate to obtain consent from their members and others they gather data from and to be transparent about how those data are used. I turn it around and say: What is the problem? Why is that not happening? Why is that being rebuffed? What is anybody worried about here in a political party that they wouldn’t want to build trust with their constituents and potential constituents about how they use their data? That’s the way I look at it.

In terms of the remedies in this chamber, we all know that the budget implementation act — the BIA — has been amended in the past. That’s a fact. It was amended at the request of the Minister of Finance, I think in 2016, and at the will of the chamber there was an amendment put forward in 2017 that was rejected by the House. So it has happened. Whether that’s the way to go or if there’s another way to go, I look at it and say this is a real issue. This is an issue that, at this point, the House does not seem to be at all interested in addressing.

The political parties have rebuffed — I find it amazing — their own elected members on the Ethics Committee, two officers of Parliament who repeatedly say this is a priority for Canadians to maintain confidence in our electoral system. I don’t know what the remedies are, Senator Housakos; I’m sorry.

Hon. Paula Simons: Senator Deacon, you touched quite disturbingly on the power of political parties and bad actors to weaponize this kind of data. But I wanted to ask about something much simpler. Given the low voter turnout that we’ve seen over the last decades, is there a danger that if people don’t feel that parties can be trusted to keep their data, that they won’t volunteer, that they won’t donate, that they won’t answer questions in a poll? What is the impact of this kind of lack of privacy protection on our day-to-day relationship with our democracy?

Senator C. Deacon: Thanks, Senator Simons. I would say that businesses will tell you how it affects customer bases. If the customer base doesn’t trust how they are using data, what data they’re collecting, what they’re using it for and how that benefits individuals, they tend to lose engagement with those customers.

I think the same may be true for voters, as 96% of Canadians have said they want political parties to have privacy protections. That’s a pretty clear number. There aren’t a lot of things that 96% of Canadians agree on.

I agree with the findings of the House of Commons Ethics Committee, which is that it undermines our democracy. It undermines things over time.

I know the House of Commons is not chomping at the bit to deal with this, but it is an issue that I think the Senate needs to be very well aware of. It’s worrisome that we haven’t seen any action yet. Thank you.

Hon. Denise Batters: It is very short. I’m a member of the Legal Committee, Senator Deacon, and despite the Trudeau government including this part dealing with the Elections Act in their budget implementation act, were you aware that neither the Chief Electoral Officer nor the Privacy Commissioner were consulted at all by the Trudeau government despite their including this in their budget implementation act? Were you aware of that?