• About
  • Offices
  • Careers
  • News
  • Students
  • Alumni
  • Payments
  • FR
Background Image
Bennett Jones Logo
  • People
  • Expertise
  • Knowledge
  • Search
  • FR Menu
  • Search Mobile
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
View all
Practices
Corporate Litigation Regulatory Tax View all
Industries
Capital Projects Energy Funds & Finance Mining View all
Advisory
Crisis & Risk Management ESG Strategy and Solutions Governmental Affairs & Public Policy
View Client Work
International Experience
Insights News Events
New Energy Economy Series Business Law Talks Podcast Economic Outlook
ESG & the CIO Subscribe
People
Practices
Industries
Advisory Services
Client Work
About
Offices
News
Careers
Insights
Law Students
Events
Search
Alumni
Payments
Subscribe

Stay informed on the latest business and legal insights and events.

LinkedIn LinkedIn Twitter Twitter Vimeo Vimeo
 
Blog

A “Step Back Overall” for Privacy

May 13, 2021

Federal Privacy Commissioner Calls for Stronger Privacy Protections in Bill C-11

Written By Ruth Promislow, Sébastien Gittens and Michael Whitt, Q.C.

In November 2020, the federal government tabled Bill C-11, the proposed new private-sector privacy law that would replace the current regime under the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA).We reported on Bill C-11 in Understanding the Draft Consumer Privacy Protection Act: A Summary of the Key Changes Proposed.

At the request of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, the federal Privacy Commissioner shared his submission on Bill C-11. Calling Bill C-11 as "a step back overall" for privacy, the Commissioner's submission sets out in excess of 60 recommendations, including the following concerns:

  • Control
    • The Privacy Commissioner asserts that Bill C-11 does not include a requirement that individuals understand the consequence of what they are consenting to in order for consent to be meaningful. He argues that the language in Bill C-11 which provides that "[c]onsent must be expressly obtained, unless the organization establishes that it is appropriate to rely on an individual's [implied] consent" should be revised to remove the wording permitting the organization to determine that implied consent is appropriate.
    • The Privacy Commissioner also criticizes the exceptions to consent in Bill C-11 which provide that an organization does not have to obtain consent where it is impractical to do so.
  • Flexibility without accountability
    • The Privacy Commissioner asserts that Bill C-11 weakens the accountability provisions by leaving organizations to self-regulate. He asserts that organizations should be required to undertake privacy impact assessments for new, higher-risk activities, and should be subjected to proactive audits by his office.
  • Responsible innovation
    • The Privacy Commissioner asserts that the exceptions to the requirement of obtaining consent for the collection, use or disclosure of information are too broad or ill-defined to promote responsible innovation.
  • A rights-based foundation
    • The Privacy Commissioner asserts that Bill C-11 prioritizes commercial interests over the privacy concerns of individuals, and seeks the entrenchment of privacy as a human right in the legislation.
  • Access to quick and effective remedies
    • The Privacy Commissioner asserts that the list of violations that could lead to administrative penalties is too narrow, as it does not include obligations related to the form or validity of consent, the exceptions to consent, or violations of the accountability provisions.
    • The Privacy Commissioner further asserts that the creation of a Tribunal (to review his exercise of power and consider his recommendations for penalties) adds an unnecessary layer to the process. He recommends that he be empowered to impose the penalties directly, rather than making a recommendation to the Tribunal.
  • Cross-Border transfers
    • The Privacy Commissioner has made 14 recommendations specifically with respect to trans-border data flows, including a recommendation that the Commissioner: (i) "… may request an organization to demonstrate the effectiveness of any safeguards put in place to govern data transfers"; and (ii) be " empowered to prohibit, suspend, or place conditions on, offshore transfers of data where substantially similar protection is not in place".

The Privacy Commissioner's submission to the Standing Committee might be a signal that significant changes could be made to the current draft of Bill C-11. Organizations should actively monitor developments in this area to ensure their compliance efforts are aligned with upcoming changes to the legal regime. If you have questions regarding how Bill C-11 may impact your organization and obligations, please contact the Bennett Jones Privacy and Data Protection team.

Download PDF

Authors

  • Ruth E. Promislow Ruth E. Promislow, Partner
  • J. Sébastien A. Gittens J. Sébastien A. Gittens, Partner, Trademark Agent

Our Managing Partners on Workplaces Where Women Thrive

Related Links

  • Insights
  • Media
  • Subscribe

Recent Posts

Blog

Budget 2023 Proposes Significant Amendments to Canada's [...]

March 31, 2023
       

Blog

Artificial Intelligence—A Companion Document Offers [...]

March 30, 2023
       

Blog

Canada Using the Carrot Instead of the Stick to Decarbonize in Budget 2023

March 30, 2023
       

Blog

Navigating Political Contributions: Alberta's Election [...]

March 30, 2023
       

Blog

Canadian Government Announces Intention to Lower Criminal Interest Rate

March 29, 2023
       
Bennett Jones Centennial Footer
Bennett Jones Centennial Footer
About
  • Leadership
  • Diversity
  • Community
  • Innovation
  • Security
  • History
Offices
  • Calgary
  • Edmonton
  • Montréal
  • Ottawa
  • Toronto
  • Vancouver
  • New York
Connect
  • Insights
  • News
  • Events
  • Careers
  • Students
  • Alumni
Subscribe

Stay informed on the latest business and legal insights and events.

LinkedIn LinkedIn Twitter Twitter Vimeo Vimeo
© Bennett Jones LLP 2023. All rights reserved.
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Use
Logo Bennett Jones