TOTAL: {[ getCartTotalCost() | currencyFilter ]} Update cart for total shopping_basket Checkout

Canada Dashboard Digest | Notes from the IAPP Canada Managing Director, September 9, 2016 Related reading: IAPP, UN release joint report on building ethics into privacy frameworks

rss_feed

DPC18_Web_300x250-COPY
GDPR-Ready_300x250-Ad

There was an interesting piece in the Ottawa Citizen this week in which a university professor who teaches statistical analysis at the University of Waterloo argues against Statistics Canada having more legally enforceable powers to compel the disclosure of personal information.

I have to admit that I’m right on the fence with this one. For one thing, I understand the importance of information to government that makes policy and programs for the entire country. The information our government has should be complete, up-to-date and as accurate as possible. If we’re going to ask our government to make good policy and deliver good programs, then we shouldn’t tell them that they have to do so with one hand tied behind their back. They need our information.

On the other hand, the questions they want to ask (and do ask) require you to reveal some pretty intimate and personal details. Should we not be able to control who asks for this and say “no thanks” if we find their questions simply too invasive?

And, for me, the big thing — as it is with most all of privacy law — is that it comes down to trust. Many of us provide Google and Facebook with much more revealing information about ourselves in order for those companies to provide us with free services and for us to be served targeted advertising. It’s not a particularly altruistic motive when compared to a democratic government trying to make policy and deliver programs to its people. But, for those of us who do use Google and Facebook, I think we do it because of a certain degree of trust. 

Interesting that it appears to be difficult for the government to achieve a similar level of trust. 

1 Comment

If you want to comment on this post, you need to login.

  • comment Amalia Steiu • Sep 9, 2016
    Same comments posted for the Ottawa Citizen article. I read Kris Kline's comment and I have to agree with the facts he presented. But I am not on the fence. I think the way the 2016 Census was conduct lacked transparency and committed a HUGE invasion of privacy. I had to complete the long form and I was absolutely shocked at the kinds of questions that were part of it. I delayed the completion of the census for as long as I could and then I had people knocking on my door to press me to complete it. I didn't want to. In the spirit of our Privacy Principles I wanted to understand - for each piece of intimate and private information - what was it needed for (Purpose) and I needed to be given Choice to answer some of it - not all of it. I want to know if this data will be used for "other" departments - such as income tax for spouses, etc. I am now "awaiting" an Audit from any other Government organization that may have seen the data (as it was not clear "Who this data will be shared with") to come and ask me for some back tax I didn't pay or something I forgot to declare. It was a scary experience. Australia had a similar scary experience and people are starting to think that Australia is becoming a Police state..... I don't want that for Canada #NotWhereIlive.