SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 136

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 28, 2022 11:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 136 - Nov/28/22
Mr. Mario Beaulieu (La Pointe-de-l'Île, BQ)
  • Nov/28/22 1:47:42 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, personal information is a shared jurisdiction. The Government of Quebec already has Law 25 on personal information. Are there any guarantees that the new legislation will not infringe on Quebec's jurisdiction? Has the member already considered that? Does he have any examples?
45 words
All Topics
  • 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
Ms. Andréanne Larouche (Shefford, BQ)
  • Nov/28/22 4:16:30 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his speech. I would like to come back to the topic of adopting this motion and particularly the importance of sending Bill C-27 to committee, to make sure all the details are in place. It is important that the committee do its work properly. This is very technical. Quebec has Bill 25. How can we ensure that there is no interference between Bill 25 and Bill C-27? How can we combine the work of both levels of government? This is a shared jurisdiction. Could my colleague comment on that?
102 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 136 - Nov/28/22
Mrs. Julie Vignola (Beauport—Limoilou, BQ)
  • Nov/28/22 4:30:47 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, I would like to take 15 seconds to congratulate my colleague on delivering half his speech in French. He has improved by leaps and bounds in less than a year. Now, the moment we have all been waiting for, my question. Quebec has a law that protects its citizens' privacy, law 25. We talked about it earlier. In the early 2000s, PIPEDA's paragraph 26(2)(b) stated that the Governor in Council would, by order, respect Quebec's legislation. Essentially, the federal act would not apply with respect to personal information about individuals' property or their civil rights. In other words, the act would leave matters under Quebec's jurisdiction alone. Even though Quebec's law 25 already complies with EU expectations, Bill C‑27 contains no clause guaranteeing that the federal government will respect the application of Quebec's law. My question is simple. Will my colleague work to ensure that the federal government respects Quebec's law 25 and that there will be an order to that effect?
175 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border