Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

Thank you. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For the sixth year in a row, the Commissioner's report speaks to the lack of information and privacy legislation for municipal governments.

The GNWT has identified concerns about the impact on day-to-day municipal operations and administration, costs, training and capacity as reasons why municipal information and privacy legislation cannot proceed at this time.

Municipal governments collect a substantial amount of personal information from residents and hold a great deal of information of interest to the public. The need for openness and transparency applies as much to them as to any other level of government. While the committee acknowledges the challenges of developing and implementing information and privacy legislation, we are not satisfied that they excuse the GNWT's failure to take a proactive approach on this issue. Elections and human rights legislation, to name two examples, could also be said to be challenging to implement, expensive and at times inconvenient; however, we recognize their importance in a democratic society and do not question the need to allocate resources to them. Why should information and privacy legislation be any different? As the Commissioner said to us, quoting her Alberta counterpart, Mr. Frank Work, "the right to access to information is precious. No government should ever oppose or impede it on the basis that it is too expensive, too time consuming or that only the troublemakers use it."

The committee would also point out that municipal staff are required to handle personal information and respond to information requests from the public in any case, and suggests that training and guidance in the form of legislation and policies would, if anything, make that aspect of their work less difficult.

The committee has, therefore, taken it upon itself to write to the NWT Association of Communities in order to hear directly from them what is required in order for them to implement information and privacy legislation. Given the time needed to draft new legislation, we do not expect that a bill could be introduced before the next election; however, we encourage the government to begin work immediately to allow legislation to be brought in during the term of the 16th Assembly. In our view, this would provide ample time for the government to resolve implementation concerns raised by municipal governments.

I move that this committee recommends that the GNWT bring forward a plan, including timelines for developing and implementing municipal information and privacy legislation that addresses the implementation concerns raised by municipal governments and that will allow for consideration of legislative amendments by the 16th Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The motion is in order.

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

Thank you, committee. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Another of the Commissioner's ongoing recommendations from past years is that the NWT enact its own "made-in-the-north" privacy legislation to regulate how the private sector collects, uses and discloses personal information. As an example of a concern with how the private sector handles personal information, she cited the continued practice of some NWT businesses of printing credit card numbers in their entirety on transaction slips. In southern Canada, it is now standard to print partial numbers only, which helps to prevent theft.

Although the NWT private sector is already regulated by the federal Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA), the Commissioner points out that a small and distant office in Ottawa is unlikely to have the time to address complaints and issues of a local nature. PIPEDA also does not protect employees from misuse of their personal information by employers. Some other Canadian jurisdictions, including Alberta and B.C., have already enacted provincial legislation to address the gaps left by PIPEDA.

The GNWT has indicated it intends to review the effectiveness of PIPEDA in 2006 in order to determine whether territorial legislation is also necessary. The committee looks forward to seeing the results of this review.

I move that this committee recommends that the GNWT review the effectiveness of the Personal Information Protection and Electronics Documents Act and the need for territorial legislation on private sector use of personal information, and provide a report on its findings to the committee before the end of 2006. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The motion is in order. To the motion.

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

Thank you, committee. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As in previous reports, the Commissioner recommends the GNWT take the initiative to raise information and privacy issues in devolution discussions and with aboriginal governments in order to encourage them to include some form of regulation within their governance structures. She states that although there are likely to be cultural differences on many information and privacy issues, all peoples have the right to an open government, which requires access to records, and the right to expect a certain level of privacy.

The GNWT indicated in its response to the 2003-2004 recommendations that information and privacy matters are being addressed in devolution and aboriginal land, resource and self-government negotiations, in the Tlicho Agreement and in the Deline, Gwich'in and Inuvialuit self-government agreements-in-principle. It is unclear to the committee whether the provisions are limited only to information the governments handle as delivery agents for GNWT programs and services, or whether they extend to all the governments' operations. The committee would like more information from the GNWT on the scope of the access and privacy issues being discussed in the negotiation process and how proactive the GNWT has been in encouraging emerging governments to incorporate freedom of information and protection of privacy into their structures.

I move that this committee recommends that the GNWT ensure access and privacy issues are considered in devolution and self-government negotiations, encourage and offer assistance to aboriginal governments to develop their own regulations where other legislation does not apply, and provide further detail to the committee on its efforts in its formal response to this report. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The motion is in order. To the motion.

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

Thank you, committee. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As in past reports, the Commissioner raises the importance of ensuring contractors who handle government information are aware of and comply with the requirements of ATIPP. Her concerns appear to be addressed in part by terms and conditions incorporated into GNWT contracts and the October 2005 amendments to the act, which made contractors directly responsible for protecting personal information. However, the need for ongoing enforcement and monitoring of compliance continues to be an issue. Specific measures she recommends include requiring contractors to notify the public body of any requests or demands made by foreign authorities for personal information, and of any unauthorized disclosure of information that has taken place.

I move that this committee recommends the GNWT ensure adequate measures are in place to monitor and enforce contractors' compliance and to detect and defend against disclosure of personal information to foreign authorities. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The motion is in order. To the motion.

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

Thank you, committee. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Commissioner's report also emphasizes the need to consider privacy issues before moving public registries online. While information from registries such as the land titles registry has always been open to public inspection, the ability for someone to misuse personal information or collect it in mass for commercial purposes has been limited until recently by the practical limitations of a paper registry in a fixed location. The Commissioner suggests a number of questions the GNWT should be asking itself before moving public registries online; for example, what is the purpose of the registry, and whether individuals should be asked whether they consent to their personal information being disclosed or used for other purposes such as direct marketing.

I move that this committee recommends the GNWT consider privacy issues and consult with the Information and Privacy Commissioner in order to take advantage of

her expertise before moving any more public registries online. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The motion is in order. To the motion.