SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Brenda Shanahan

  • Member of Parliament
  • Caucus Chair
  • Liberal
  • Châteauguay—Lacolle
  • Quebec
  • Voting Attendance: 67%
  • Expenses Last Quarter: $108,181.16

  • Government Page
  • Nov/28/22 12:44:28 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, that is a very interesting question, which I believe has come up at different times in this Parliament and previous Parliaments. It is an area, I am sorry to say, that I do not have a lot of insight into, but the overriding principle of safeguarding the information of Canadians has to be first and foremost, especially for any political party that hopes to earn their votes.
69 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/28/22 12:42:58 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, I know that my colleague opposite is very interested in this matter because our personal information was leaked by a Quebec financial institution. That was very worrisome. I believe that it is in the business interests of financial institutions to protect their customers and not to lose them. They have really taken the lead in this area. The provinces have followed suit, but I believe it is also the federal government's role to enhance these protections and ensure that standards exist across the country.
87 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/28/22 12:41:08 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the concern the member brings with that question. We have many definitions of “minor”, but it is generally understood that it is the different provinces that would legally establish who a minor is. We can understand it being youth using the Internet, and we need to make the extra effort to protect them and ensure they have the tools to protect themselves.
68 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/28/22 12:30:44 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for York Centre. I am pleased to rise in the House today to speak to the digital charter implementation act, 2022, in particular the aspect on the consumer privacy protection act. If I have time, I will also discuss the artificial intelligence and data act. I am very proud to speak to these two pieces of legislation that introduce a regime that seeks to not only support the technological transformation, but also help Canadians safely navigate this new digital world with confidence. These past few years, Canadians have witnessed these technological shifts take place. They have taken advantage of new technologies like never before. In 2021, more than 72.5% of Canadians used e-commerce services, a trend that is expected to grow to 77.6% by 2025. According to TECHNATION, a 10% increase in digitalization can create close to a 1% drop in the unemployment rate. What is more, every 1% increase in digitalization can add $8.7 billion to Canada's GDP. In order to take advantage of those major benefits for our economy, we must ensure that consumers continue to have confidence in the digital marketplace. Technology is clearly an intrinsic part of our lives, and Canadians have growing expectations regarding the digital economy. It is absolutely essential that the Government of Canada be able to meet those expectations. With this bill, the government is putting forward a regime that gives Canadians the protection they deserve. First, as stated in the preamble of the digital charter implementation act, 2022, Canada recognizes the importance of protecting Canadians' privacy rights. Similarly, the 2022 consumer privacy protection act also provides important protections for Canadians. That said, our government has listened to the input of various stakeholders, and we have made changes to improve this bill. I was on the committee in the last Parliament, and there was a lot of discussion about the previous bill, Bill C‑11. I am very pleased to be able to speak to Bill C-27, so that we can get all that work done in this Parliament. One of the most important changes we have made is enhancing protection for minors. Some stakeholders felt that the previous legislation did not go far enough to protect children's privacy. I agree. Consequently, the bill was amended to define minors' information as sensitive by default. This means that organizations subject to the law will have to adhere to higher standards of protection for that information. The legislation also provides minors with a more direct route to delete their personal information. This will make it easier for them to manage their online reputation. I think this is a really important change, because we know that young people are very aware and very capable of using all types of digital platforms, but at the same time, we need to make sure that they are able to protect their reputation. In addition to protections for minors, we also made changes to the concept of de-identification of personal information. According to many stakeholders, the definitions in the old bill were confusing. We recognize that having well-defined terms helps ensure compliance with the act and provides more effective protection of consumers' information. In that regard, I understand that, because we are talking about new technologies and an evolving industry, it is important for all members to share their expertise, since that will help us develop a better piece of legislation. The difference, then, between anonymous information and de-identified information needs to be clarified because, clearly, if information is de-identified but an organization or company is able to reidentify it, that does not serve the purpose of having anonymous information. Data-based innovation offers many benefits for Canadians. These changes contribute to appropriate safeguards to prevent unauthorized reidentification of this information, while offering greater flexibility in the use of de-identified information. The new law also maintains the emphasis on controlling the use of their personal information by individuals. That remains a foundation of the law, namely that individuals must be able to fully understand the purpose for which information will be used and consent to that purpose in the most important circumstances. However, the modern economy must also have flexible tools to accommodate situations that are beneficial but that may not require consent if the organization respects certain limits and takes steps to protect individuals. The approach advocated here continues to be based on the concept of individual control, but proposes a new exception to consent to resolve these gaps as a tool for safeguarding privacy. The new provisions propose a general exception to cover situations in which organizations could use personal information without obtaining consent, provided that they can justify their legitimate interest in its use for circumstances in which the individual expects the information to be used. In addition, to prevent abuse, the exception is subject to a requirement that the organization mitigate the risk. For example, digital mapping applications that take photos of every street and that we use to view them, particularly to help with navigation, are widely accepted as being beneficial. However, obtaining individual consent from every resident of the city is impossible. I believe that everyone in the House will agree that it is hard to imagine how we managed before we had access to those navigation applications. Last evening, I had a visit with a family member in Ottawa and was very happy to have my mapping application to find my destination. The presence of an exception, combined with a mitigation requirement, therefore allows individuals to take advantage of a beneficial service while safeguarding personal information. The example shows another key aspect for building trust and transparency. Digital mapping technology presents a certain level of transparency. The vehicles equipped with cameras can be seen on our streets and the results can also be seen posted and available online. However, there are some technologies or aspects thereof that are more difficult to see and understand. That is why the bill continues granting individuals the right to ask organizations for an explanation regarding any prediction, recommendation or decision made in their regard by an automated decision-making system. What is more, these explanations must be provided in plain language that the individual can understand. These provisions also support the proposed new artificial intelligence act. However, I do not think that I have time to get into that, so I will end there.
1085 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/28/22 12:22:24 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the speech from the member for Windsor West, especially around the issue of artificial intelligence. This is a brand new area. How does the member feel about the importance of this, and does he feel we are ready to legislate in this area? I know it is an area of concern for my constituents, and I would like to hear the member's thoughts on that.
70 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border