Discussion · Private Members' Business
Adam Chambers Conservative
“We can share tax data safely without showing who the taxpayers are. But if someone is convicted of tax evasion in court, their name should be made public. They do not deserve privacy.”
“Mr. Speaker, my friend from Winnipeg North quite rightly points out a potential concern with privacy. I would say two things. The first is that I think any data provided to the Parliamentary Budget Officer could be appropriately anonymized such that it would be impossible to identify any taxpayer, whether that is a corporate or individual taxpayer. We should judiciously protect the privacy rights of Canadians. However, with respect to the information that would be required to be publicly disclosed by the government, it would be about individuals who have been convicted of tax evasion in Canada. Those individuals, if they have been convicted, have been convicted in a court of law and do not deserve any privacy rights, in my opinion.”
-
Reply to a debate question
Relevance 100 of 100
Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.
See full analysis
Mr. Speaker, my friend from Winnipeg North quite rightly points out a potential concern with privacy. I would say two things. The first is that I think any data provided to the Parliamentary Budget Officer could be appropriately anonymized such that it would be impossible to identify any taxpayer, whether that is a corporate or individual taxpayer. We should judiciously protect the privacy rights of Canadians. However, with respect to the information that would be required to be publicly disclosed by the government, it would be about individuals who have been convicted of tax evasion in Canada. Those individuals, if they have been convicted, have been convicted in a court of law and do not deserve any privacy rights, in my opinion.