Just weeks after last year’s election, Mark Carney’s government committed not one, but two privacy blunders in rapid succession. First, Bill C-2 – literally the first substantive bill of the new government – buried lawful access provisions in an omnibus “border measures” bill that would have established unprecedented warrantless access to the personal of information of Canadians. Second, days later it introduced Bill C-4, which was framed as affordability measures bill but included provisions that exempt political parties from the application of privacy protections. The bizarre assault on privacy felt like an opportunistic attempt to insert unpopular rules in the hope that few were paying attention. The strategy was failure: the government ultimately introduced a new border measures bill with lawful access removed (new lawful access rules are expected in their own bill this year) and now a Senate committee which studied the Bill C-4 privacy rules has recommended that they be killed, removed from the bill, or subject to a two-year sunset clause.

The Senate recommendation and Bill C-4 is finally getting some attention after months of privacy advocates raising alarm bells. The bill would leave political parties subject to weaker privacy rules than virtually any other major organization in Canada that collects personal data. Instead of enforceable statutory obligations backed by independent oversight, the government proposes relying primarily on internal privacy policies drafted and administered by the parties themselves. There is no comparable enforcement regime, no equivalent compliance structure to that faced by the private sector, and no meaningful external accountability mechanism.

Moreover, Bill C-4 is deemed to be in force as May 31, 2000, meaning that it would retroactively exempt the parties from any privacy violations that may date back decades. The ostensible reason for the provisions is a B.C. case that applied provincial privacy law to federal political parties. The government is now seeking to render that case moot and provide all political parties with an effective exemption from any privacy laws other than measures found in the Elections Act.

This is not the first time the government has tried to exempt political parties from standard privacy laws. Bill C-65, which failed in the last Parliament, contained similar provisions. However, the provisions were in a bill on the Elections Act, not buried among tax measures. Moreover, the previous approach was stronger. It included measures to address data breaches and the requirement to notify affected individuals as well as certain restrictions, including the sale of personal information. This iteration removes the data breach notification requirements and drops the sale restrictions. Oddly, the government’s Charter statement for the bill found no Charter issues despite the fact that Bill C-65 statement raised multiple issues worthy of analysis.

The government had seemingly little interest in defending the indefensible. The House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance wrapped up its study of the bill last November and incredibly refused to hear from any witnesses that would speak to the issue. In fact, despite concerns raised in briefs from the Privacy Commissioner of Canada and the Commissioner of Elections, the committee (consisting almost entirely of Liberal and Conservative MPs) limited its discussion of an entire section of the bill to a thirty second description of the provisions from a government official. No witnesses, no debate, no acknowledgement of concerns raised by experts. It was as if the provisions did not exist.

That changed last week once the bill made it to the Senate. The Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs decided to tackle the issue with a range of witnesses and invitations to submit briefs (I submitted one posted here). The resulting recommendation arrived swiftly: remove the provisions entirely, split them into separate legislation for proper study, or allow them to pass only with a sunset clause requiring future reconsideration.

The committee’s recommendations will now move to another committee and potentially the full Senate. If senators adopt amendments removing or separating the privacy provisions, the bill would need to return to the House of Commons, delaying the entire legislative package. The government would no doubt like to fast track Bill C-4 and avoid any delays. But with the political party self-interest evident to all, it is time to fix the privacy blunder from the early days of the Carney government. Kill the privacy provisions in Bill C-4 and start fresh with a targeted bill that creates a genuine privacy law framework applicable to political parties in Canada.

Related posts:

How the Liberal and Conservative Parties Have Quietly Colluded to Undermine the Privacy Rights of Canadians Government Remains Silent as it Eviscerates Political Party Privacy in Canada By Fast Tracking Bill C-4 Government Seeks To Exempt Political Parties From Privacy Laws Even As CRTC Reports They Are Leading Source of Spam Complaints Government Reverses on Privacy and the Charter: Department of Justice Analysis Concludes Political Party Privacy Bill Raises No Charter of Rights Effects