“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague, who is the other vice-chair of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. I have had conversations with the senator, and our understanding is that the Liberals rejected the previous version of this bill, citing privacy and freedom of expression in particular. These were the arguments that led them to vote against it during the previous parliamentary session. Now, she has raised an interesting point regarding the opinion of Mr. Dufresne, Canada’s Privacy Commissioner. He confirms that there have been improvements in the bill in terms of privacy protection. I would like my colleague to reassure us on this point and, above all, to reassure the Liberals opposite that there have indeed been improvements since the last bill, so studying it in committee would be worthwhile.”
Statement grade
A+
The average of Signal, Relevance, Respect and Clarity.
Average 96 / 100
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Thanks 14%Claims 40%Reasoning 47%
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Thanks · 15 wordswe do sit together on HUMA, and I very much appreciate working with the member.ThanksClaims · 44 wordsWe know the Privacy Commissioner has endorsed this bill.3There are specific provisions in section 12(2) that would ensure that whatever method is chosen needs to be highly effective, be operated by a third party organization, 1and maintain user privacy and protect personal information.2Reasoning · 52 wordsThe fact that the Privacy Commissioner has endorsed this bill says leaps and bounds, because his job is to ensure that the privacy of Canadians is respected.For sure, I think this would be great to go to committee, where we can have a deeper dive on those conversations regarding Bill S-209.
