►
Description
Legislative Assembly of Alberta
assembly.ab.ca
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B
I'd
like
to
call
this
meeting
to
order
and
welcome
to
members
and
staff
that
are
in
attendance
to
this
meeting
of
the
standing
committee
of
Alberta's
economic
futures.
My
name
is
Glenn
Van
Dyke
and
I'm.
The
MLA
for
Athabasca
bar
head
Westlock
and
chair
of
this
committee
I'd
ask
that
members
and
those
joining
the
committee
at
the
table
introduce
themselves
for
the
record,
starting
to
my
right
with
Emily
turton.
E
B
B
Okay,
we
seem
to
be
having
some
difficulties
with
the
connection
between
ourselves
and
Emily.
Mciver
looks
like
he
will.
Try
join
us
shortly
again,
so
we'll
move
we'll
move
forward.
I
would
like
to
note
for
the
record
the
following:
substitutions
Mr
turton
for
Mr
Walker
and
Mr
rain
for
Mrs
elard,
a
few
housekeeping
items
to
address
before
we
turn
to
the
business
at
hand.
Please
note
that
the
microphones
are
operated
by
Hansard
staff
committee.
Proceedings
are
live
streamed
on
the
internet
and
broadcast
on
Alberta
assembly
TV.
B
The
audio
and
video
stream
and
transcripts
of
meetings
can
be
accessed
via
the
Legislative
Assembly
website.
Those
participating
by
video
conference
are
encouraged
to
please
turn
on
your
camera.
While
speaking
and
mute
your
microphone
when
not
speaking,
members
participating
virtually
who
wish
to
be
placed
on
the
speakers
list
are
asked
to
email
or
send
a
message
to
the
committee
clerk
Aaron,
Roth
and
members
in
the
room
are
asked
to
please
signal
to
the
chair.
B
I
would
ask
that
you,
please
set
your
cell
phones
and
other
devices
to
silent
for
the
duration
of
the
meeting.
So
with
that,
we
will
move
on
to
business
at
hand
with
the
approval
of
agenda.
Is
there
anyone
that
would
move
approval
of
the
agenda?
That's
distributed,
Emily
turton
moves
that
the
agenda
for
the
January
10
2023
meeting
of
the
standing
committee
of
Alberta's
economic
future
be
adopted
as
distributed.
Is
there
any
discussion.
B
Hearing
none
the
motion
is
carried
item
number
three
on
our
agenda
is
the
approval
of
the
minutes
from
the
September
27
2022
meeting
of
the
committee?
Are
there
any
errors
or
omissions
to
note,
if
not
a
member
would
move
the
adoption
of
the
minutes,
MLA
fien,
to
move
that
the
minutes
of
the
September
27
2022
meeting
of
the
standing
committee
on
Alberto's
economic
future
be
adopted
as
circulated
all
those
in
favor
in
the
room.
B
B
Item
number
four
on
our
agenda
is
review
of
the
2019-2021
annual
report
of
the
property
rights
advocate
office,
a
4A
overview
of
the
committee's
Mandate,
and
review
honorable
members
on
December
14
2022,
the
Legislative
Assembly
passed
government
motion
19,
which
referred
the
2019-2021
annual
report
of
the
Alberta
property
rights
advocate
office
to
the
standing
committee
on
Alberta's
economic
future
in
accordance
with
Section
5-5
of
the
property
rights
Advocate
act.
The
committee
must
report
back
to
the
assembly
within
60
days
of
the
report
being
referred
to
the
committee.
B
If
the
assembly
is
then
sitting
or
if
it
has
not
then
sitting
within
15
days
after
the
commencement
of
the
next
sitting
of
the
assembly
and
the
2019-2021
annual
report
of
the
property
rights
advocate
office
has
been
posted
to
the
committee's
internal
website.
Are
there
any
questions
before
we
continue
with
our
review
of
the
annual
report?.
B
Happy
to
be
here
thank
Q.
We
can
hear
you
know.
Thank
you
very
much
so
item
4B
presentation
from
the
property
rights
Advocate
members.
It
is
customary
to
commence
reviews
of
this
Nature
by
hearing
a
presentation
from
the
report's
author,
as
this
is
the
first
meeting
where
the
committee
is
considering
this
matter.
If
the
committee
wishes
to
hear
a
presentation
on
the
annual
report,
it
will
need
to
First
consider
a
motion
inviting
the
property
rights
advocate's
office.
To
do
so.
B
C
B
B
So
at
this
time,
I
would
like
to
invite
Mr
Peter
Dobby
the
to
come
to
the
table
and
make
a
presentation
on
the
2019-2021
annual
report
of
the
property
rights
advocate
office.
Mr
Adobe.
You
have
approximately
15
minutes
to
make
your
presentation,
which
will
be
followed
by
a
period
of
questions
by
committee
members.
E
Chairman
Dyken
for
the
and
the
members
of
the
committee
for
the
invitation
to
present
today
I'm
delighted
to
be
here
to
assist
the
committee
in
its
important
work,
dealing
with
Alberta's
economic
prosperity
and
future
before
I
proceed.
I
just
wanted
to
introduce
assistant
property
rights,
Advocate
behind
me,
Leon
munt,
currently,
Leanne
and
I
form
the
property
rights
advocate
office.
E
I
will
table
some
information
and
then
I
look
forward
to
discussing
issues
arising
from
the
report
or
anything
that
I
can
assist
the
committee
with
in
discussions.
Today
it
was
my
honor
to
be
appointed
to
property
rights
advocate
in
early
2020.,
the
former
Advocate
having
retired
I
would
like
to
extend
my
gratitude
to
Leanne
assistant
property
rights,
Advocate
and
Margarita
strasinski
intake
officer
for
welcoming
me
to
the
group
and
assisting
me
in
the
transition.
E
Shortly
after
I
became
the
property
rights
Advocate
this
office
merged
with
the
farmer's
advocate
office,
of
which
I'm
also
The
Advocate.
Both
offices
worked
together
collaboratively
in
the
past.
In
fact,
I
was
the
farmer's
Advocate
at
the
time
when
the
legislation
was
being
reviewed
or
proposed
to
create
the
office
of
the
property
rights.
Advocate
and
I've
worked
directly
with
the
previous
incumbents
in
the
property
rights
Advocate
position.
E
Both
offices
had
worked
together
collaboratively
in
the
past
prior
to
the
merging,
and
we
continue
to
do
so
even
more
efficiently.
In
2021,
the
legislative
assembly
of
Alberta
established
the
select
special
committee
on
real
property
rights.
The
committee's
Mandate,
including
included,
providing
feedback
on
questions
such
as
are
the
processes
under
the
expropriation
act
adequate
to
protect
Real
Property
Owners?
Should
the
law
of
adverse
possession
be
abolished?
Do
real
property
rates
for
private
owners
need
to
be
expanded
or
perhaps
constitutionally
entrenched,
and
when
Real
Property
Owners
are
deprived
of
their
use
of
real
property?
E
Are
the
legal
remedies
available
to
them?
Adequate
I
was
pleased
to
be
able
to
speak
to
that
committee
on
these
issues
prior
to
the
committee
submitting
its
final
report,
which
it
did
on
May
24,
2022
I
also
provided,
subject
matter
expertise
to
the
committee
in
a
number
of
of
meetings
and
responding
to
questions,
I
look
forward
to
committee
to
continuing
to
work
with
the
committee
and
the
government
of
Alberta
pending
the
outcome
of
the
recommendations
the
committee
made
to
the
legislature
as
such.
E
The
observations
that
I
would
like
to
make
are
as
follows.
It
has
always
been
the
case
as
Farmers
advocate,
of
which
I've
been
the
incumbent
now
for
close
to
11
years,
that
the
the
issue
of
property
rights
and
land
ownership
and
interactions
between
the
two
has
been
important
to
albertans,
and
particularly
farmers
and
ranchers
I
was
fortunate
to
be
able
to
work
with
the
prior
incumbents
in
the
position
of
property
rates.
Advocate
and
I've
reviewed
all
of
the
work
that
they've
done
in
all
of
the
reports.
E
The
challenge
that
the
property
rights
advocate
office
has
faced
since
its
Inception
has
has
been
the
legislation
that
governs
its
rule.
The
property
rights
advocate
office
is
required,
among
other
things,
to
provide
information
to
albertans
on
their
on
the
issues
of
property
rights
and
to
gather
feedback
and
provide
it
to
the
legislature
on
issues
raised
by
albertans.
E
As
the
issue
of
property
rights
writ
large
really
is
a
political
one,
and
in
my
experience
as
Farmers
Advocate
and
now,
property
rights,
Advocate
most
albertans,
that
I
that
I
deal
with
in
those
capacities
are
quite
happy
and
to
have
the
their
mlas
interested
involved
in
and
dealing
with
the
issue
of
property
rights
generally
at
a
political
level.
It's
my
view
as
property
rights,
Advocate
and
Farmers
Advocate,
that
that
is
an
important
rule
for
mlas
and
I
know.
Many
of
you
I've
dealt
with
you
directly
or
through
your
office's,
assist
their
constituents
on
these
issues.
E
E
So
part
of
the
important
work
of
the
property
rights
advocate
office
is
to
provide
information
and
answers
to
albertans
about
what
property
rates
are
in
Alberta,
what
the
rules
are
and
what
the
fences
are
within
which
they
can
operate
and
I've
provided
to
to
Mr
Roth
copies
for
all
members
of
the
committee
of
the
Alberta
Land
institute's
guide
to
property
rights
in
Alberta
and
those
doc.
Those
documents
are
being
passed
around
and
if,
if
a
copy
needs
to
be
tabled,
I
am
asking
that
it'd
be
tabled.
As
part
of
the
committee's
record.
E
The
the
guide
to
property
rights
in
Alberta
is
something
that
I
recommended
that
members
of
the
standing
commit.
The
select
special
committee
on
real
property
rights
have
be
aware
of,
and
review
and
I'm
commending
it
to
the
members
of
this
committee
as
what
I
would
describe
as
the
seminal
work
on
property
rights
in
Alberta
by
seminal
I
mean
it's.
E
It's
the
work
that
will
guide
future
documents
because
it
gathers
together
a
good
history,
a
clear
explanation
of
property
rights
and
is
a
useful
means
for
mlas
and
for
albertans
of
understanding
how
we
operate
property
rates
in
the
province
of
Alberta
and
in
Canada.
So
I
strongly
recommend
that
members,
if
they
have
an
opportunity,
review
the
the
document
and
provide
a
copy
or
a
link
to
their
their
office
staff.
E
So,
for
example,
one
of
the
matters
that
comes
up
from
time
to
time
and
your
offices
may
hear
is
the
question
of
am
I
entitled
as
a
landowner
to
compensation
if
a
zoning
change
happens
or
if
I
have
to
sell
property
but
I'm
not
able
to
to
to
maximize
the
value
of
that
property
and
in
Canada
the
history
has
been.
That
is
statutory
regime
that
creates
zoning
or
land
use.
Restrictions
does
not
result
in
compensation
to
a
landowner
for
the
closing
off
of
a
potential
future
use.
E
That
is
not
the
case
in
all
jurisdictions
in
the
world,
but
that
has
been
the
legal
history
in
Canada
and,
as
I'm
sure
mlas
know.
Part
of
that
is
to
provide
some
certainty
as
to
the
cost
of
operating
if
a
government
is
expropriating
land
for
Highway
or
other
use,
so
in
Canada
our
process
is
that
the
current
use
of
the
land,
the
maximum
value
associated
with
that
is
what
a
landowner
is
able
to
receive
compensation
for.
E
Not
all
potential
future
uses,
and
that's
one
issue
that
that
was
raised
with
the
select
special
committee
on
real
property
rights
is
that
something
that
is
fair
is
that
something
that
should
continue
in
my
view,
is
property
rights.
Advocate
that
is
has
been.
The
history
in
Canada
would
be
difficult
to
change
and
there
are
likely
good
policy
reasons
to
not
change
it.
E
The
the
other
issue
that
I
would
like
to
raise
is
is
the
issue
of
Alberta's
understandings,
understanding
and
issues
with
property
rights
generally
as
Farmers
Advocate
and
property
rights
Advocate.
Much
of
what
I
hear
from
landowners
and
albertans
is
a
concern
not
necessarily
about
the
loss
of
property
rights
themselves,
but
the
process
by
which
their
property
rights
issues
are
addressed.
So,
for
example,
as
we
all
know,
the
economy
changed
in
the
middle
of
the
the
last
decade
and
oil
prices
dropped.
E
As
a
result,
many
oil
and
gas
operators
were
unable
to
pay
amounts
owing
to
landowners
for
surface
rights.
Payments.
Landowners
accept
that
for
the
benefit
of
albertans,
the
the
statutory
regime
requires
them
to
either
enter
into
a
surface
lease
or
or
face
the
risk
of
a
right
of
Entry
order
for
which
they
will
receive
compensation.
E
What
frustrated
landowners
in
the
second
half
of
the
last
decade
was
a
feeling
that
the
ability
to
receive
fair
compensation
was
being
frustrated
by
the
processes
involved
in
some
of
the
organizations,
the
former
surface
rights
board,
now
the
land
and
energy
of
the
what's
the
proper
name,
land
of
property
race
tribunal.
Thank
you.
E
E
Timely
response
is
is
important
for
landowners
and
Farmers
to
be
able
to
deal
with
matters
on
an
ongoing
basis.
There
should
not
be
a
significant
cost
or
delay
associated
with
them
seeking
reimbursement
formats
that
are
otherwise
owing,
so
those
would
be
the
types
of
policy
issues
that
landowners
have
generally
sought.
Our
assistance
with
at
the
property
rights
advocate
office
and
the
farmer's
advocate
office.
E
It's
process
generally,
as
opposed
to
the
fundamental
right
issue,
and
so
I
know
that,
with
this
committee,
the
the
focus
is
Alberta's
economic,
Prosperity
or
economic
future,
and
so
I
would
ask
the
committee
to
consider
in
its
work
how
how
government
is
structured
in
a
way
or
how
can't
be
structured
in
a
way
to
ensure
that
the
the
rights
that
landowners
have
the
property
rates
are
dealt
with
in
inefficient
and
a
timely
manner.
So
that's
something
again.
We
hear
concerns
about
process,
not
as
many
concerns
about
the
issue
of
Rights
themselves.
E
The
the
final
thing
that
I
would
say
is
that
it's
a
challenge
in
our
office.
Both
teams
are
quite
small.
We
do
have,
though,
in
many
ways
the
best
job
in
the
province
of
Alberta.
What
we
do
is
that
we
we
deal
with
issues
that
we
didn't
create,
but
we
can
rarely
make
worse.
So
at
the
property
rights
advocate
office
and
the
farmer's
advocate
office,
we
kind
of
follow
a
three-step
approach.
We
identify
the
issues.
What
is
the
issue
that
this
albertan
Orlando?
Has?
E
It's
less
Direct
in
the
case
of
the
property
rights
Advocate
there
we
provide
information
to
government
departments
and
organizations,
but
we
still
have
what
I
view
as
the
best
job
in
the
province
of
Alberta
and
our
team
is
delighted
to
be
able
to
work
for
albertans
and
assist
them
and
mlas
in
the
work
to
govern
which
ultimately
involves
deciding
where
money
is
spent,
what
the
rules
are
and
where
we
should
move
forward.
So
I
am
again
delighted
to
be
invited
here
today.
E
B
C
Yes,
thank
you
very
much.
Mr
Sharon.
Thank
you
very
much,
Mr
Adobe
for
the
comprehensive
reports,
as
well
as
the
work
that
you
do,
my
riding
of
spruce,
grove
and
Stony
Plain.
While
it's
mostly
Urban
in
nature,
it
has
strong
agricultural
roots
and
it's
surrounded
by
some
I
think
some
of
the
best
Farmland
in
the
province.
I
know
that's
debatable,
but
you
know.
Obviously,
property
rights
and
farmer
and
advocacy
for
Farmers
is
obviously
huge
in
my
riding.
C
So
I
do
have
a
couple
quick
questions
here
for
you,
and
my
first
question
is
referred
to
on
page
six
of
the
report.
It
describes
a
March
2021
creation
of
the
special
select
committee
on
real
property
report.
Sorry
real
property
rights.
This
committee
was
tasked
with
providing
feedback
and
questions
regarding
the
potential
abolition
of
the
law
of
adverse
possession.
So
my
question
is
given
that
this
law
has
recently
been
abolished.
Can
you
provide
some
information
on
the
work
that
was
completed
by
this
committee?.
E
Thank
you
for
the
for
the
question.
Yes,
the
committee
did
provide
a
final
report
which
created
a
number
of
recommendations.
That
report
has
been
filed
with
the
speaker
and
presented
to
the
house
and
I
know
that
the
legislature
is
considering
a
number
of
the
recommendations.
One
of
the
first
outcomes
of
the
recommendation
was
legislation
passed
in
the
last
session
that
did
abolish
the
law
of
adverse
possession
and,
as
I
think
most
of
us
know.
The
law
of
adverse
possession
was
a
a
relic
of
common
law.
E
That
in
Alberta
was
one
of
the
few
jurisdictions
in
the
world.
Frankly,
that
adverse
possession
claims
were
allowed
to
be
Advanced
and
really
the
reason
for
abolishing
it
came
down
to
this.
In
general
terms,
the
onus
should
not
be
on
my
uncle
as
a
landowner
or
your
aunt
or
your
grandmother,
to
diligently
police
the
boundaries
of
her
property
to
ensure
that
others
are
not
taking
possession
of
that
property
with
a
view
to
possibly
advancing
a
claim
in
the
future.
So
by
abolition
of
the
legislation.
E
It
is
clear
that
that
the
legislature
has
now
said
the
onus
would
be
on
a
proponent
of
someone
seeking
to
advance
a
claim
against
the
land
order
to
prove
that
there
was
a
a
basis
for
the
claim
and
really
that
comes
down
to
was
there
a
an
improvement
of
the
landing
error.
You
know
was
there
something
that
could
be
compensated
and
the
law
of
property
act
provides
for
remedies
under
the
in
the
courts
for
those
types
of
applications,
and
so
to
boil
it
down
to
to
this.
E
The
legislature
agreed
with
the
recommendation
of
the
committee
that
landowners
should
not
have
to
police
their
lands
and
be
at
risk
of
adverse
possession
claims,
so
that
was
important
signal
I
Believe
by
the
committee
and
the
legislature,
two
landowners
that
the
committee
and
the
legislature
understands
the
importance
of
property
rights
and
make
and
wants
to
make
sure
that
the
the
onus
is
in
the
proper
location.
There
are
a
number
of
other
and
very
important
recommendations
made
by
the
committee,
some
of
which,
well
frankly,
all
of
which
are
political
in
nature.
E
In
a
in
the
big
p
sense
should
Alberta
push
for
a
constitutional
amendment
to
entrench
property
rights
which
are
currently
not
entranced
in
the
Constitution.
Should
there
be
requirements
on
government
agencies
to
set
hard
timelines
for
reviewing
responding
and
paying
claims
of
landowners
in
certain
situations.
E
The
the
balance
of
the
five
recommendations,
apart
from
the
adverse
possession
recommendation,
require
work
and
consideration
by
the
legislature
in
MLA,
is
to
determine
the
balance
of
where,
where
the
legislature
wants
to
spend
time
and
energy
and
what
interests
can
be
protected
by
changing
or
what
What.
The
best
course
is.
So
the
balance
of
the
the
recommendations,
in
my
view,
are
important,
but
do
require
further
thoughtful
analysis
and
review
by
the
legislature.
C
Please
Mr
chairman
Mr
Dolby
you
touch
base
at
your
office,
has
recently
merged
with
the
farmer's
advocacy
or
advocate
office,
an
office
which
you
have
collaborated
with
in
the
past
and
continue
obviously
to
do
so
now.
So
just
wondering
if
you
could
just
elaborate
and
expand
upon
how
this
merger
has
affected
day-to-day
activities
of
the
property
rights
advocate.
E
Sure
again,
I
appreciate
the
question.
The
the
short
answer
is
that
we
sit
together
in
the
same
building.
Now
when
we're
not
working
remotely.
In
the
past,
the
office
of
the
property
rights
Advocate
was
housed
within
the
Department
of
Justice.
There
has
been
a
change
that
has
been
the
office
and
its
budget
responsibilities
and
legislation
has
been
transferred
to
the
authority
of
the
minister
of
Agriculture
and
irrigation
now,
and
it
recognized
that
the.
E
The
work
while
different
is
similar
and
that
there
may
be
efficiencies
in
having
one
person
perform
both
roles.
It's
now
the
case
that
as
property
rights
and
Farmers
Advocate
you're
paying
one
salary
for
a
person
to
to
manage
both
portfolios
and
secondly,
historically
when
landowners
would
contact
a
property
rights
advocate
office
and
it
was
clearly
an
issue.
It
was
a
farm,
a
ranch
issue,
or
it
was
something
that
was
within
the
jurisdiction
or
general
of
working
of
the
farmer's
advocate
office.
E
They
would
informally
refer
those
files
to
us,
and
that's
the
that
was
a
collaboration
now
with
Leanne
in
the
office,
the
same
office
with
members
of
the
farmer's
Advocate
team,
we've
been
able
to
create
more
of
a
cross-pollination
of
understanding
of
the
issues,
and
so
Leanne
has
been
able
to
help
the
farmers
advocate
office,
team
members
by
research
and
providing
direct
information
on
files
that
maybe
aren't
directly
property
rights,
Advocate
files,
but
are
important
to
Farmers
and
ranchers.
So
we're
able
to
use
the
talents
of
both
teams
to
work
together.
E
B
Thank
you
for
those
answers.
I
I
am
remiss
I.
I
should
have
made
note
that
the
document
that
The
Advocate
spoke
about
the
guide
to
property
rights
in
Alberta
has
been
distributed
to
members
as
a
hard
copy
in
the
room
for
those
that
are
attending
virtually
committee.
Clerk
has
sent
to
you
a
copy
of
it
through
email.
B
So
if
you
have
any
any
questions
pertaining
to
that,
if
there
is
a
copy
available
and
also
if
you
would
like
to
receive
a
hard
copy,
I
would
ask
that
you
just
contact
committee
clerk,
Aaron,
Roth
or
myself,
and
we
can
get
a
hard
copy
to
you
after
the
meeting
has
completed.
Are
there
any
other
questions?
Emily
fian,
followed
by
McIver.
E
E
Part
of
having
the
best
job
in
the
province
is
that
we
don't
administer
much
in
the
farmer's
advocate
office.
We
don't
enforce
many
rules
against
landowners.
The
lens
we
look
at
things
is:
is
this
in
the
interest
of
farmers
and
ranchers,
and
how
can
we
help
make
it
better?
The
responsibility
statutorily
for
grazing
leases
and
other
leases
is
not
something
that
is
within
the
farmer's
advocate
office.
It's
through
Alberta,
environment
and
Parks,
or
whatever
the
the
current
name
of
the
department
is.
E
What
do
I
do
and
so
we're
able
to
provide
advice
and
Direction
and
advocacy
to
that
landowner
to
say
here's
the
things
you
need
to
do
and
in
fact,
in
some
cases
we
have
assisted
landowners
who
have
had
a
lease
canceled
grazing
lease
canceled
or
Farm
Improvement
lease
canceled
for
failure
to
comply
with
certain
terms
of
the
lease.
In
many
cases
these
are
leases
of
long
duration
and
that
landowner.
H
E
Not
have
been
aware-
or
you
may
have
someone
who
have
aged
out
a
father
has
aged
out
but
is
still
on
title,
so
we've
actually
acted
to
provide
advice
and
advocacy
for
landowners
how
to
appeal
those
matters
or
how
to
to
have
those
matters
mediated
and
generally
very
successfully,
so
that
the
time
energy
and
money
they
spent
in
the
improvements
over
the
over
the
years
are
are
protected.
So
we
don't
have
direct
responsibility
for
administration,
but
it
becomes
within
that
Matrix
of
things.
H
E
Again,
thank
you
Emily.
If
Ian
for
the
question
short
answer
is
no
in
one
of
my
rules
is
I
am
a
member
of
the
board
of
directors
of
synergy
Alberta,
which
is
a
a
board
that
provides
support
for
Synergy
groups
throughout
Alberta
and,
as
you
likely
know,
Synergy
groups
are
groups
of
landowners,
municipalities
and
Industry
that
meet
together
to
deal
with
common
interests.
With
respect
to
generally
oil
and
gas
operations.
That's
been
the
history
of
it.
E
Part
of
of
the
history
of
of
real
property
rights
for
First
Nations
has
been
a
concern
that
their
issues
have
not
been
addressed
at
the
most
senior
levels,
and
so
my
experience
has
been
that
First
Nations
governments
wish
to
deal
directly
with
the
heads
of
provincial
governments
and
we
get
no
calls
or
concerns
there
and
I
do
know
that
the
government
of
Alberta
has
a
department
that
deals
directly
with
matters
with
First.
Nations
and
I
have
not
had
a
single
complaint
or
concern
brought
to
our
office.
D
I'm
asking
just
because
you're
talking
about
some
expanded
roles
and,
of
course
it's
one
of
the
ones
that
I
wonder
about
whether
or
not
there
should
be
a
role
for
the
for
the
advocate's
office
to
be
involved
in
those
kind
of
claims.
But
you're
satisfied
that
they're
dealt
with
at
the
appropriate
level.
E
That
is
an
important
part
of
respecting
the
the
process
that
involves
First,
Nations
and
albertans
in
Alberta.
That's
been
made
clear
to
me
in
discussions
with
some
of
my
friends
who
are
members
of
First
Nations
as
an
explanation
of
why
they
would
not
be
interested
in
joining
a
Synergy
group.
That
being
said,
it's
certainly
something
that
the
property
rights
advocate
office
could
look
to
to
answer
specific
questions.
E
So,
for
example,
if
if
another
government
department
or
an
MLA
or
committee
had
questions,
we
would
certainly
welcome
a
specific
request
for
an
opinion,
advice
and
our
thoughts
on
it.
But
again,
I
believe
that
it
is
best
left
with
the
government
with
mlas
the
cabinet
and
the
premier
to
deal
directly
with
First
Nations.
Thank.
B
M
Thanks
chair
and
if
I
ask
something
that's
been
asked
asked
already:
I
apologize,
the
audio
is
cutting
in
and
out
a
little
bit
so
anyways
I'll
carry
on.
Thank
you
for
being
here
on
the
report
on
page
12,
a
segment
of
the
2021
topics
of
concern
are
classified,
as
quote
other
now.
I
could
be
mistaken,
but
I'm
not
sure
that
the
other
was
in
previous
years.
So
what
does
other
topics
of
other
concern
and
yeah?
E
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Emily
McIver.
The
the
reason
that
we
created
another
category
is
that
there
are
a
significant
number
of
one-off
type
of
issues.
So,
for
example,
we
will
get
calls
sometimes
repeated
calls
from
a
landowner
who
has
a
real
concern
about
a
historic
action
taken
by
municipality
with
respect
to
either
zoning
a
bylaw
or
a
road
issue,
and
so
those
themselves
do
not
necessarily
fall
within
a
specific
category,
and
our
concern
was
if
we
create
a
category
for
everything,
the
chart
becomes
less
helpful.
E
Cascading
effect
or
effect
on
a
significant
number
of
other
albertans
or
landowners,
and
so
by
by
creating
a
catch
category.
It
helps
us
to
understand
you
know,
what's
a
trend
in
terms
of
an
issue:
what's
the
current
Trend
as
opposed
to
a
one-off,
and
so
we
do
have
one-offs
they
generally.
They
generally
relate
to.
E
M
A
E
Thank
you
again
for
the
question:
Emily
McIver,
the
the
short
answer
is
that
the
charts
are
created
in
response
to
inquiries
received.
So
it's
a
responsive
document
and
my
my
assessment
is
that
in
2000
and
prior
in
Prior
years,
the
office
received
and
was
involved
in
a
lot
of
work
with
organizations
for
landowners
who
had
had
mineral
rights.
E
Concerns
and
I
know
that
the
free
old
mineral
rights
Owners
Association,
with
real
minerals
Association,
has
an
agenda
of
issues
that
they
want
government
to
address
and
feel
that
could
be
in
the
interest
of
owners
of
mineral
rights
or
private
owners
of
mineral
rights
and
from
time
to
time,
there's
more
energy
expended
by
the
Association
and
its
members.
In
dealing
with
those
issues.
There
tends
to
be
at
the
time
of
an
election
or
a
change
in
government.
More.
B
E
E
The
the
fact
that
we
were
dealing
with
covet
and
the
there
was
a
change
in
the
activities
of
the
of
of
the
office
in
terms
of
much
less
direct
Outreach
fewer
presentations
affected
my
decision
to
not
issue
an
annual
report
within
one
year.
There
was
essentially
nothing
new
to
report,
and
the
third
reason
was
that
the
the
work
of
the
select
special
committee
on
real
property
rights
overlapped
that
time
period
and
I
elected,
to
combine
the
two
reports,
because
I
wanted
an
opportunity
to
assess
the
historical
numbers.
E
So,
for
example,
part
of
what
I
was
able
to
determine
from
reviewing
some
of
the
metrics
is
that
in
some
particular
years
the
the
contacts
or
the
metrics
are
are
somewhat
skewed.
We
would
have
375
contacts
by
one
individual
and
so
I
wanted
to
understand
the
work
and
the
scope
and
and
what
had
been
going
on
in
the
office
in
the
past
and
so
for
those
three
reasons:
I
elected,
to
provide
a
a
two-year
report.
My
plan
going
forward
is
to
provide
an
annual
report.
F
E
Okay,
thank
you
for
that
important
question.
Emily
Carson,
it
has
been
my
experience
that
being
on
the
phone
and
being
out
there
creates
calls,
and
so
what
we
will
be
hoping
to
do
in
the
coming
year
and
years
is
to
increase
the
presence
of
the
property
rights
advocate
office
at
events
in
different
constituencies.
I'll
use
constituencies
as
a
word
but
really
throughout
the
province,
and
so
we've
been
unable
to
participate
in.
There
have
been
canceled
conferences,
and
so
we
hope
to
be
providing
presentations
at
important
conferences.
E
Hope
to
provide
work
to
the
urban
municipalities
Association
present
to
the
rural
municipalities.
Association
increase
the
profile
so
that
decision,
makers
and
and
people
who
have
their
own
source
of
of
contacts
are
able
to
be
aware
of
our
office.
It's
scope,
whether
limited
or
not,
and
then
what
can
be
provided.
So
we
hope
to
without
spending
significant
additional
money.
J
Yeah,
thank
you
just
another
topic
that
only
appears
in
one
year
is
out
of
unimpeded
access,
which
appears
under
the
topics
for
2020
on
page
11.
But
it's
not
listed
on
topics
concern
any
other
year,
let's
included
under
the
topic
about
impeded
access.
Why
is
there
only
a
concern
one
year?
Is
it
just
a
new
category,
or
maybe
you
can
just
expand
on
that?
For
me.
E
E
We
have
had
issues
either
at
the
farmer's
advocate
office
or
the
property
rights
advocate
office,
dealing
with
access
through
grazing
leases
or
or
Farm
Improvement
leases
or
problems
with
a
dispute
between
a
landowner,
a
surface
rates
owner
and
an
oil
and
gas
operator,
and
then
you
know
the
Locking
of
gates
and
what
are
rights
and
responsibilities,
and
so
in
my,
in
my
view,
these
tend
to
be
one-offs
or
limited
issues.
It
tends
to
be
the
the
case
where
I
would
say
the
majority
of
the
sort
of
roadway
access
problems.
E
E
A
E
Lot
of
times
it's
family
you'll,
see
in
depending
on
where
you
are,
if
you're
in
the
spruce,
grove,
Stony,
Plain
area
or
you're
up
in
Manning
a
lot
of
times.
These
are
brothers
looking
to
irk
other
brothers
or
there's
there's
some
history
involved,
and
so
they
are
not
a
I
guess
a
trending
concern.
They
tend
to
be
one-offs,
they
tend
to
be
personality
driven
and
generally
it
doesn't
come
to
shotguns.
J
B
B
Okay
hearing
none,
then
I
believe
that
that
we
have
come
to
the
completion
of
this
portion
of
our
agenda.
Thank
you,
Mr
Adobe,
for
your
presentation
today
and
for
answering
the
questions
of
our
committee.
You
are
welcome
to
stay
if
you
like,
but
your
your
time
on
the
agenda
is
completed
at
this
time.
E
Thank
you
Mr
chair
and
the
members
of
the
committee.
It
was
a
pleasure
to
be
here.
I
know
it's
important
work
that
you
do
and
if
you
want
advice,
here's
the
advice.
I
would
give
you
as
mlas.
You
are
working
to
hold
the
future
of
the
province
and
to
improve
it,
and
a
very
smart
businessman
told
me
many
years
ago
that
there's
a
difference
between
a
commitment
and
a
goal,
and
it
has
really
informed
the
the
work
I've
done
and.
E
It
this
way
he
said
I
may
have
a
goal
of
having
my
kids
be
successful.
You
know
whether
they
finish
high
school
or
get
a
trade
or
get
a
degree,
and
so
I
may
have
a
goal
to
help
them
through
there.
But
my
commitment
is
to
raise
good
kids
and
so
it
my
goal
may
be
that
you
know
my
son
or
daughter
will
have
finished
high
school,
but
if
something
comes
up
for
whatever
reason-
and
they
can't
it
doesn't
change
my
commitment
to
raise
good
kids
and
again
in
the
work
that
you
do.
E
If
you
can
remember
your
commitment
as
mlas
to
do
what
you
can
in
this
particular
committee
for
Alberta's
economic
Prosperity,
it
will
stand
you
in
good
stead
and
certainly
the
difference
between
a
goal
and
commitment
has
helped
me
make
decisions
and
continue
to
focus
on
the
important
work
so
I.
Thank
you
again.
I
would
welcome
an
invitation
to
come
back
at
any
time
if
other
issues
arise
and
you
need
further
information.
B
Okay,
thank
you
very
much,
Mr
Novi,
okay
committee.
We
are
moving
to
item
4C
on
our
agenda.
Honorable
members,
our
next
item
is
in
relation
to
the
committee's
review
of
the
annual
report
of
the
property
rights
advocate
office
and
is
to
consider
next
steps
in
the
review.
I
would
like
to
open
the
floor
for
any
comments,
questions
or
emotions
in
relation
to
how
the
committee
would
like
to
proceed
with
this
review.
Any
comments,
questions,
motions.
B
B
Honorable
members,
who
are
now
at
the
point
in
our
review,
where
we
will
commence
deliberations
and
consider
recommendations
in
relation
to
our
review
of
the
2019-2021
annual
report
of
the
Alberta
property
rights
advocate
office.
Are
there
any
comments
or
emotions
that
members
which
wish
to
bring
forward
at
this
time.
B
Seeing
and
hearing
none,
then
I
can
I
believe
that
we
can
move
on
to
item
4E
report
to
the
Legislative
Assembly.
Honorable
members,
as
we
have
complete,
concluded
our
deliberations,
we
will
now
move
on
to
consideration
of
a
draft
report
to
the
legislative
assembly
in
relation
to
the
Mandate
given
to
the
committee
by
government,
motion
19
and
the
property
rights
Advocate
act.
Are
there
any
comments
or
motions
pertaining
to
the
drafting
of
report
to
the
assembly?
C
Yes,
thank
you
very
much.
Mr
chair
I'd
like
to
move
that
the
standing
committee
on
Alberta's
economic
future
directive
committee
clerk
to
prepare
a
draft
report
to
the
legislative
assembly
in
relation
to
the
committee's
review
of
the
property
rights
advocate
office.
2019
the
2021
annual
report
to
be
approved
by
the
chair
and
Deputy
chair
after
its
distribution
to
committee
members.
B
L
B
Rather,
the
ministry
of
technology
and
innovation
has
taken
over
that
role.
As
a
result,
the
committee
will
need
to
rescind
its
previous
motion
inviting
the
technical
briefings
and
reissue
a
new
invitation
to
the
oipc
and
the
appropriate
Ministry
I
would
now
open
the
floor
to
any
comments,
questions
or
motions
in
relation
to
this
matter.
C
Thank
you
very
much.
Mr
chair
I
moved
at
the
standing
committee
on
Alberta's
economic
future,
rescind
the
motion
passed
at
its
September
27
2022
meeting,
inviting
a
technical
briefing
on
the
personal
information
protection
act
from
officials
from
service
Alberta
and
the
office
of
the
information
and
privacy
Commissioner
of
Alberta.
Thank
you,
Emily
turton.
This.
B
B
B
C
Emily
Curtin.
Sorry!
Yes,
no!
It's!
Okay!
Thank
you.
I
moved
at
the
standing
committee
on
Alberta's
economic
future,
invited
technical
briefing
on
the
personal
information
protection
act
from
officials
from
the
ministry
of
technology
and
Innovation,
and
the
office
of
the
information
and
privacy
Commissioner
of
Alberta.
A
B
Opposed
the
motion
is
carried
with
that
we
move
to
item
5B
technical
briefings.
Honorable
members.
Today
we
have
officials
with
us
from
the
ministry
of
technology
and
Innovation,
and
also
the
information
and
privacy
commissioner.
Each
is
invited
to
provide
a
technical
briefing
up
to
20
minutes
in
length
to
be
followed
by
questions
from
committee
members.
After
both
briefings
are
completed.
I
would
invite
Ministry
officials
to
come
to
the
table
for
their
technical
briefing.
N
Good
morning
to
the
chair,
members
of
the
committee
and
the
commissioner
and
her
staff
and
others
present,
my
name
is
Maureen
toll.
I
am
the
assistant
Deputy
minister
of
the
data
privacy
and
Innovation
division
within
technology
and
Innovation
and
I
have
with
me
today.
Meredith
Gail
I
am
here
to
speak
to
you
today
about
the
personal
information,
protection
act
or
Pippa,
as
we
lovingly
call
it
before.
I
speak
about
the
ACT.
Specifically
I
will
provide
some
information
regarding
where
pipa
Services
reside
in
government
within
my
division.
Sorry,
we
should
be
on
the
next
slide.
N
N
Oh
okay!
Oh
okay!
Oh
we'll
just
stay
here
within
my
division.
The
privacy
policy
and
governance
Branch
performed
several
functions,
including
leading
the
enhancement
and
development
of
policy
instruments
related
to
content
management,
which
includes
data
information
and
Records
management
and
privacy,
including
both
foip
and
Pippa.
In
addition,
the
branch
provides
training
and
compliance
activities
across
the
government
of
Alberta
in
support
of
these
policy
instruments.
N
The
branch
also
manages
the
government
of
Alberta
foip
Pippa,
help
desk,
which
provides
General
guidance
about
foip
and
Pippa
to
albertans
the
accountability
to
uphold
the
intent
and
the
rights
within
foip
and
Pippa
are
shared
with
the
office
of
the
information
and
privacy.
Commissioner,
I
will
now
speak
very
broadly
about
what
privacy
is
before
we
speak
specifically
about
pipa
privacy
is
not
defined
within
pipa
or
within
any
other
privacy
legislation
in
Canada.
However,
broadly
speaking,
privacy
is
the
right
to
be
let
alone
or
freedom
from
interference
or
intrusion.
N
The
foundation
for
the
right
of
to
Pro,
right
of
and
two
privacy
stems
from
the
Canadian
Charter
of
Rights
and
Freedoms,
which
is
not
specifically
mentioned
privacy
or
the
protection
of
personal
information.
However,
it
does
afford
protection
under
Section
7,
the
right
to
life,
liberty
and
security
of
the
person
and
Section
8,
the
right
to
be
secure
against
unreasonable
search
or
seizure
information.
Privacy
is
the
right
to
have
some
control
over
how
your
personal
information
is
collected
and
used
in
today's
digital
age.
N
In
order
to
reflect
the
change
in
realities
of
digital
economy,
modernization
of
privacy
laws
need
to
find
the
balance
between
providing
effective
privacy
protection
for
albertans
and
enabling
albertans
to
enjoy
the
social
and
economic
benefits
of
data
use
next
slide.
Please,
and
the
next
slide.
Please.
N
N
The
health
information
act
governs
and
protects
health
information
in
the
custody
or
under
the
control
of
a
custodian.
For
example,
Ministry
of
Health
pharmacies
and
pharmacists,
optometrists
registers,
nurses,
dentists,
Etc,
the
personal
information
protection
and
electronic
documents
act
or
Pepita
is
the
federal
version
of
Pippa.
Pepita
applies
to
the
federal
works
undertakings
and
businesses.
N
Organizations
subject
to
substantially
similar
provincial
Privacy
Law
are
generally
exempt
from
papita.
However,
Pepita
does
not
sorry.
However.
Pepita
does
apply
to
provincial
organizations
when
they
engage
in
commercial
activities
across
Canada
common
examples
of
federally
regulated.
Businesses
include
telecommunication
companies,
Airlines
and
Banks,
and
our
Focus
for
today
is
the
personal
information
protection
act,
as
I
said
or
HIPAA
Pippa
has
been
deemed
substantially
similar
to
papita.
N
This
means
that
organizations
subject
to
pipa
are
generally
exempt
from
papita,
with
respect
to
the
collection,
use
or
disclosure
of
personal
information
that
occurs
within
the
province.
Pippa
is
a
consent-based
legislation,
meaning
it
primarily
primarily
relies
on
consent
for
the
collection,
use
and
disclosure
of
individuals,
personal
information
by
individuals
and
organizations
operating
in
the
private
sector.
N
There
are
only
limited
and
specific
circumstances
set
out
in
Pippa
when
consent
may
not
be
required,
consent
can
include
Express
consent,
implied
consent
and
consent
by
not
opting
out
Express
consent
is
when
consent
is
provided
in
writing
or
verbally,
for
example,
when
a
customer
signs
up
for
a
loyalty
card
at
a
grocery
store
and
the
customer
signs
a
consent
form
explaining
the
use
and
disclosures
of
their
personal
information.
They
are
giving
Express
consent
implied.
N
By
not
opting
out,
they
have
provided
consent
for
the
organization
to
collect,
use
or
disclose
personal
information
for
the
specified
purpose.
For
example,
an
individual
enters
a
draw
to
win
a
prize
and
provides
their
name
and
home
email
address.
The
draw
form
clearly
provides
a
space
to
check
off
if
they
do
not
want
to
receive
more
information
about
similar
products
from
the
company.
N
Some
key
points
of
the
legislation
are
organizations
that
are
subject
to
pipa
must
develop
and
follow.
Policies
that
are
responsible
to
meet
the
organization's
obligations
under
the
ACT
organizations
must
designate
one
or
more
individuals
to
be
responsible
for
ensuring
the
organization
complies
with
pipa.
N
N
An
example
of
the
reasonable
person
test
would
be
if
an
individual
is
asked
to
fill
out
a
tenant
application
form
and
on
the
form
the
landlord
asks
for
the
applicant's
social
insurance
number
and
bank
account
number.
So
the
landlord
can
cross-check
information
on
the
applicant's
credit
check,
while
the
landlord
needs
to
screen
prospective
tenants
requiring
this
type
of
personal
information
is
not
reasonable.
For
this
purpose,
a
less
privacy
invasive
way
of
determining
the
applicant's
reliability
would
be
to
obtain
references
from
former
landlords.
N
A
brief
history
on
the
evolution
of
Pippa,
the
Act
was
passed
on
December
3rd
2003
and
has
been
subject
to
a
number
of
amendments,
since
it
was
first
proclaimed
in
2004.,
Pippa
was
amended
in
2005
to
align
with
the
health
information
act,
the
election
finances
contributions,
disclosure
Act
and
the
post-secondary
learning
act,
as
well
as
addressing
key
concerns
relating
to
legislative
review
and
oipc
jurisdiction
on
May
16
2006.
The
legislative
assembly
of
Alberta
appointed
an
all-party
special
select
special
committee
to
review
Pippa.
N
In
response
to
this
report.
The
government
of
Alberta
introduced
Bill
54,
which
passed
on
October
27
2009
the
2009
amendments
added
special
Provisions
for
transparency
when
using
service
providers
outside
of
Canada
and
mandatory
breach
notification
provisions
in
response
to
a
Supreme
Court
decision.
The
personal
information
protection
Amendment
Act
was
introduced
in
the
legislature
on
November
18
2014
and
received
Royal
assent
on
December
17
2014..
N
N
N
It
also
includes
operating
a
private
school
or
college
or
An
Early,
Childhood
Services
Program
the
right
hand
of
the
slide
provides
a
list
of
organizations
that
are
not
subject
to
pipa.
This
includes
individuals
acting
in
a
personal
way
relating
to
their
home
and
family
organizations
that
are
subject
to
the
foip
ACT
and
political
parties
are
also
not
subject
to
pipa
next
slide.
Please.
N
Rapid
technological
shifts
are
fostering
academic
advancement,
offering
innovative
solutions
to
age-old
problems,
driving
economic
growth
and
enhancing
personal
connectivity
risks
to
personal
information
like
identity
theft
and
privacy
breaches
increases
annually
as
the
world
becomes
more
digital.
The
government
of
Alberta
acknowledges
that
digital
Technologies
create
challenges
to
privacy
and
is
committed
to
addressing
these
challenges.
N
N
N
I
will
first
provide
a
comparison
between
Pippa
and
other
private
sector
privacy
laws
within
Canada.
Then
I
will
discuss
a
general
trend
of
worldwide
Privacy
Law
development
and
highlight
a
few
major
examples
of
privacy
laws
adopted
by
selected
countries.
Next
slide,
please,
as
I
previously
mentioned
in
Canada
the
personal
information
protection
and
electronic
documents
act.
Pipita
applies
to
Federal
works
undertakings
and
businesses.
N
Pepita
does
also
apply
to
provincial
organization
when
they
engage
in
commercial
activity
within
Canada.
Alberta
organizations
can
be
subject
to
more
than
one
law,
depending
on
what
activities
they're
doing
in
June
2022,
the
government
of
Canada
introduced
Bill
c27
to
modernize
Canada's
private
sector
privacy
framework
through
a
proposed
consumer
privacy
protection
act
known
as
cppa.
N
N
The
intent
of
bill
c-27
is
to
strengthen
Canada's
private
sector
Privacy
Law,
create
rules
for
the
responsible
development
and
use
of
artificial
intelligence
and
continue
advancing
the
implementation
of
canvas
digital
Charter,
albertus
Pippa
is
deemed
substance
substantially
similar
to
papita.
Therefore,
Pippa
applies
to
Alberta
organizations.
N
N
N
Next
slide,
please
so,
globally,
at
a
global
level,
over
130
countries
have
constitutional
statements
regarding
the
protection
of
privacy.
Many
countries
have
privacy
legislation
that
governs
citizens,
information,
privacy
rights
and
how
organizations
and
agencies
must
handle
personal
information
in
relation
to
collection,
use
and
disclosure
of
personal
information.
N
We've
got
an
example
from
Australia
and
New
Zealand
and
then
another
example
is
the
general
data
protection
regulation
or
gdpr,
which
is
a
European
Union
law,
with
mandatory
rules
for
how
organizations
and
companies
must
use
personal
data
and
secure
and
transparent
way
with
Innovative
privacy
measures
such
as
the
right
to
be
forgotten.
The
gdpr
has
been
a
global
leader
in
modernizing
privacy,
legislation,
okay
and
then
I'm,
going
to
looking
at
time,
I'm
going
to
skip
right
to
slide
12.
Please.
N
So
in
closing,
I
would
like
to
highlight
three
items.
First,
Alberta's
Pippa
has
been
deemed
substantially
similar
to
papita.
This
is
important
to
keep
in
mind
when
thinking
about
potential
amendments.
This
is
also
important
as
the
changes
to
Pepita
proposed
by
Bill
c27
may
impact
pippa's
substantially
similar
status.
N
O
You
very
much
can
everybody
hear
me
all
right,
okay,
good
morning,
chair
and
members
of
the
committee,
thank
you
for
the
invitation
to
be
here
today.
I'd
just
like
to
briefly
thank
the
officials
from
technology
and
Innovation
for
their
presentation
on
pipa
there.
There
is
a
little
bit
of
overlap
here,
but
I
may
skip
over
some
of
those
parts
as
we
move
ahead.
O
My
apologies,
I
am
Diane
McLeod,
the
information
and
privacy
commissioner,
and
with
me,
is
my
assistant
commissioner.
Kim
krutzer
work
all
right.
Thank
you
all
proceed,
starting
with
slide.
Two
please
Pippa
is
an
important
law
that
provides
a
made
in
Alberta
approach
to
privacy.
Management
for
businesses
that
collect
use
or
disclose
personal
information
in
the
province
is
purpose
is
to
balance
the
rights
of
clients,
customers,
employees
and
volunteers
to
have
their
personal
information
protected
and
the
need
of
organizations
to
collect,
use
or
disclose
personal
information
for
purposes
that
are
reasonable.
O
O
O
Pippa
came
into
force
on
January
1
2004..
It
was
drafted
to
make
it
practical
for
small
and
medium-sized
Alberta
businesses
to
implement
Pepe
aims
to
protect
the
privacy
of
clients,
customers,
employees
and
volunteers
by
establishing
the
rules
for
the
collection,
use
and
disclosure
of
personal
information
by
businesses
and
organizations
in
Alberta
and
requiring
those
businesses
and
organizations
to
have
reasonable
safeguards
to
protect
that
information,
such
as
simply
locking
filing
cabinets
or
ensuring
reasonable
security
measures
are
in
place
to
keep
hackers
out
of
computer
systems.
O
O
O
An
individual
can
ask
me
to
review
the
response
received
from
an
organization
if
an
individual
is
not
pleased
with
the
response
they
received
after
requesting
access
to
their
own
personal
information.
I
may
also
on
my
own
motion.
Conduct
investigations
to
review
an
organization's.
Compliance
with
Pepa
and
I
have
ordered,
or
pardon
me,
ordered.
Making
power
under
pipa
orders
can
include
requiring
an
organization
to
fulfill
its
obligations
under
the
ACT,
such
as
responding
to
an
access
request
or
to
stop
some
action.
That
is
in
contravention
of
the
ACT.
O
Since
2004,
we
have
received
more
than
3
000
requests
for
review
or
privacy
complaints
under
Pepa.
A
vast
majority
of
those
are
resolved
through
informal
mediation
and
investigation
processes
without
the
need
for
an
inquiry,
which
is
a
formal
hearing
of
the
more
than
3
000
reviews.
Approximately
185
have
resulted
in
orders
through
the
office's
inquiry
process.
O
I
can
also
order
an
organization
to
notify
affected
individuals
if
they
have
not
done
so
already.
In
the
summer
of
2022,
my
office
issued
a
report
that
analyzed
nearly
2
000
breaches
reported
to
the
office
since
2010.
Alberta
was
a
leader
in
implementing
mandatory
breach
reporting
in
2010,
which
is
now
a
common
privacy
protection
globally.
O
O
O
I
will
now
move
from
a
technical
from
the
technical
aspects
of
the
ACT
to
some
of
the
higher
level
considerations
and
topics
for
potential
amendments
to
Pippa
that
will
be
raised
during
this
review
next
slide.
Please,
for
this
part
of
my
presentation.
I
will
start
with
a
quote
from
the
Supreme
Court
of
Canada
about
Pippa.
O
However,
because
Pippa
has
not
kept
pace
with
digitization
in
the
Myriad
of
privacy
implications
of
new
technologies,
it's
objective
can
no
longer
be
achieved
over
the
past
two
decades.
The
rise
in
the
use
of
technology
in
the
private
sector
has
enabled
organizations
to
amass
a
significant
amount
of
personal
information.
O
In
addition,
the
private
sector
is
primarily
the
developer
of
technology
used
in
the
public
and
the
health
sectors
to
collect
use,
disclose
and
protect
personal
information.
Today
there
are
novel,
cheap
and
effective
strategies.
Malicious
actors
can
deploy
to
try
to
exploit
or
steal
digital
assets,
including
personal
information
from
any
organization
that
holds
it.
O
O
I'm
going
to
skip
to
slide
six,
because
Maureen
has
covered
off
a
lot
of
what's
going
on
sort
of
in
the
in
the
global
landscapes,
so
I'll
move
on
to
slide
six.
Thank
you
among
the
changes
in
new
and
amended
privacy
laws,
individuals
have
been
given
rights
respected,
respecting
automated
decision
making.
O
In
other
words,
if
a
decision
is
made
about
or
for
an
individual
buy
a
piece
of
software
or
bot
using
machine
learning
or
artificial
intelligence
without
human
involvement,
then
recourse
becomes
available
to
the
individual
through
the
Amendments
that
have
been
implemented
into
new
laws
in
sometimes
in
Canada
and
globally.
As
Maureen
mentioned,
the
gdpr
is
one
of
them.
O
O
Another
approach
to
automated
decision
making
is
the
California
consumer
Privacy
Act,
which
requires
businesses
in
response
to
access
requests,
to
include
meaningful
information
about
the
logic
involved
in
those
decision-making
processes,
as
well
as
a
description
of
the
likely
outcome
of
the
process.
With
respect
to
the
consumer.
O
O
The
other
theme
with
new
and
modernized
laws
is
more
effective
enforcement
measures
for
Commissioners
and
other
privacy
regulators
without
getting
into
the
legal
specifics
in
today's
remarks.
These
and
many
other
changes
have
all
been
significant
to
get
up
to
speed
organizations
invested
heavily
in
preparing
for
maintaining
compliance
with
gdpr
and
the
other
laws.
As
a
result,
many
businesses
need
to
consider
the
higher
privacy
protection
threats
thresholds
in
other
jurisdictions,
which
leaves
Alberta's
Pippa
behind
to
ensure
pippa's
continued
relevance
as
a
made
in
Alberta
approach.
O
Another
impetus
for
amendments
to
pipa
is
that
a
trust
deficit
has
accumulated
between
customers
and
businesses
with
respect
to
privacy.
A
number
of
stories
have
eroded
people's
faith
in
the
protection
of
their
privacy
in
the
digital
economy,
which
has
reinforced
the
need
for
stronger
legal
protections.
Maintaining
public
trust
goes
to
the
heart
of
facilitating
a
digital
economy.
O
A
recent
example
is
the
work
we
did
in
investigating
Port
pass.
You
may
recall
Port
path
said
it
could
provide
a
mechanism
for
proof
of
vaccination
for
entry
into
Calgary
Flames
games
during
the
investigation.
However,
Port
pass
failed
to
demonstrate
that
it
implemented
any
Technical
and
administrative
safeguards
to
protect
personal
information,
as
required
by
Pepa.
O
The
second
investigation,
with
BC
and
federal
colleagues,
was
Cadillac
Fairview,
the
operator
of
shopping
centers
and
its
use
of
facial
recognition,
software
information
kiosks
without
the
without
customers
consent.
Both
investigations
resulted
in
widespread
media
coverage
and
found
the
companies
did
not
comply
with
Canadian
private
sector
privacy
laws
in
our
work
reviewing
breach
reports.
We
also
started
seeing
significant
increases
in
fishing
incidents
and
ransomware
breaches
from
a
handful
to
hundreds
of
reports
each
year.
O
There
was
a
sudden
increase
in
topics
like
algorithmic
transparency,
cyber
security
data,
Brokers,
targeted
advertising
and
profiling
being
covered
by
mainstream
media.
Algorithmic
transparency,
for
example,
is
at
its
core
about
letting
individuals
know
about
the
logic
involved.
When
a
machine
makes
a
decision
using
artificial
intelligence.
O
We
also
saw
some
stories
where
improper
handling
of
personal
information
or
deceptive
practices
involving
personal
information
destroyed
the
reputation
of
some
companies
and
generally
decrease
confidence
and
Trust
in
businesses
that
handle
massive
amounts
of
personal
information,
businesses,
stockpiling,
personal
information
for
potential
Market
use
or
Bad
actors
that
exploit
security.
Vulnerabilities
to
steal,
personal
information
are
just
some
of
the
risks
to
personal
information
that
exist
today.
O
O
To
do
this
effectively,
we
need
a
modernized
law
that
enhances
albertan's
privacy
rights
reflects
the
digital
information
economy
in
which
Alberta
businesses
are
competing
globally
and
introduces
effective
enforcement
measures
that
incentivize
compliance
as
opposed
to
the
current
model.
That
has
no
significant
consequences
for
non-compliance
with
respect
to
the
information
economy.
O
Something
else
that
must
be
considered
during
the
paper
review
is
the
increased
digitization
in
Alberta's,
public
and
health
sectors,
as
we
move
towards
better
broadband
internet
for
Rural
and
Northern
Alberta
work
to
meet
societal
demands
for
enhanced
digital
public
services
and
focus
on
Virtual
Health
Care,
Services
delivery.
We
must
recognize
that
public
and
health
sector
Innovation
goals
are
reliant
on
private
sector
products
and
tools.
O
For
example,
there
are
many
potential,
but
pardon
me
there
are
many
potential
opportunities
to
leverage
public
or
health
sector
data
to
drive
private
sector
Innovation
through
cross-sector
information
sharing.
These
are
laudable
ideas
that
are
worth
exploring,
but
keep
in
mind
these
types
of
projects.
Much
must
prioritize
protecting
albertan's,
personal
and
health
information
or
risk
failing
altogether.
O
The
only
constant
is
change,
driven
mostly
by
digitization
as
a
society.
We
now
recognize
how
vulnerable
and
valuable
our
personal
information
has
become
and
that
there
are
risks
to
our
person
and
to
our
rights
and
freedoms
when
our
privacy
is
not
adequately
protected.
It
is
for
this
and
many
other
reasons.
We
need
to
seriously
reflect
on
how
Pippa
must
operate
now
and
in
the
years
ahead,
I
made
an
Alberta
law
that
reflects
the
modern
digital
economy,
protects
albertan's,
personal
information
and
builds
trust
in
businesses.
Thank
you.
B
J
Okay,
thank
you
very
much
for
your
presentations
today
and,
and
it's
very
important,
important
issue
on
slide.
Three
of
the
presentation
you
mentioned
your
office's
role,
investigating
complaints
made
about
organizational
compliance
with
with
Pepa,
and
you
did
mention
that
you
you
get
about
3
000
complaints
a
year.
J
I
was
just
curious
if
that,
if
you
know,
has
that
been
an
increasing
thing,
given
what
you're
talking
about
we're
getting
more
digitized
all
the
time
is
like?
Is
that
like
if
we
go
back
10
years,
if
you
can
go
back
that
far,
what
was
the?
What
was
the
number
then
and
and
are
people
more
likely
to
complain
today
than
they
were
in
the
past?.
O
What
I
can
say
is
there
has
been
about
a
steady
average
of
complaints,
of
course,
that
increased
from
the
early
days
when
the
Public's
awareness
of
Pippa
was
more
limited
over
the
years,
it
has
increased,
somewhat
averaging
out
more
or
less
over
that
period
of
time.
I'm
just
going
to
check
with
my
assistant,
commissioner,
if
she
has
anything
to
add
on
that.
P
Just
that
the
nature
of
the
complaints
perhaps
have
changed
over
the
the
decade
or
two
decades,
nearly
now
where
we
have
seen
the
impact
of
technology
on
on
the
types
of
complaints.
So
now
we're
seeing
more,
as
the
commissioner
mentioned,
fishing
cyber
security
ransomware
malware
type
complaints
when
the
early
days
of
HIPAA,
it
might
have
been
more
simply
the
loss
of
an
unencrypted
laptop
that
had
personal
information
on
or
retailers.
P
You
may
remember
that
receipts
that
were
given
to
you,
when
you
paid
for
a
purchase
with
a
credit
card
used
to
have
the
full
credit
card
number
on
it,
and
now
that's
been
truncated.
So
the
type
of
complaints
have
changed.
We
still
get
some
of
those
human
error,
complaints,
but
there's
also
more
in
the
what
I
would
call
the
cyber
security
area.
J
O
J
B
Great
big
thing,
thank
you.
We
will
move
on
and
I
will
encourage
members
to
preface
your
question
if
we
for
those
attending
virtually,
we
do
have
both
the
ministry
and
the
commissioner's
office
at
the
table.
If
your
question
is
for
one
or
the
other,
it
would
be
helpful
to
preface
that
at
the
beginning
of
your
questions,
MLA
bill
as
you
may
proceed,
thank.
G
You
very
much
Mr,
chair
I,
have
a
number
of
questions,
but
recognize
that
other
committee
members
may
as
well,
so
I
won't
ask
them
all
at
once.
I
just
want
to
start
off
by
thanking
both
the
ministry
and
the
Privacy
commissioner
for
your
work
on
this
important
file
and
I.
Think
you
know,
especially
today,
with
the
acceleration
of
the
digital
transformation
with
the
use
of
AI.
G
G
So
I'll
jump
to
my
questions
and
I'll
start
off
with
the
ministry,
and
the
first
question
is
a
really
simple
one,
but
I
appreciate
the
fact
that
Pippa
does
not
define
privacy
and
that
at
the
at
the
beginning
of
your
presentation,
you
talked
about
the
Canadian
Charter,
which
doesn't
really
Define
privacy
either
and
is
quite
abstract
in
in
the
protections
that
exist
in
our
Charter
So.
Currently,
where
is
privacy
defined.
N
G
Yeah,
so
you
know
my
follow-up
is:
do
you
feel
and
I'd
love
to
hear
from
the
Privacy
commissioner
as
well,
that
this
is
a
deficit
that
that
this
is
something
that
could
be
addressed?
Federally
I
would
assume
fairly
easily,
but
is
this
something
that
would
that
is
there
a
need
and
would
it
would
it
be
helpful.
N
O
Yeah
I
mean
it's
a
it's
a
good
question.
I
I
think
that
the
Privacy
is
generally
understood
to
be
in
terms
when
it's
reference
to
privacy.
Laws
in
Canada
is
about
the
protection
of
one's
own
personal
information.
That
is
a
generally
understood,
meaning
of
the
term.
So
that's
how
it's
referred
to
so
privacy.
Is
you
know
the
term
that
we
all
refer
to,
but
it
really
is
about
control
of
one's
own
personal
information,
as
it's
referred
to.
G
N
This
is
also
an
area
I
think
where
we
have
an
opportunity
to
improve
guidance.
So
that
is
also
something
that
the
department
is
looking
at
personal
story.
When
you
know
before
stepping
into
this
role,
I
would
often
just
give
personal
information
at
stores,
because
they
didn't
know
now,
when
I'm
in
a
store-
and
they
ask
me,
can
we
have
your
email
address?
I
just
say
no
I
can't
right
so
I
I
think
there
is
great
opportunity
for
further
guidance.
G
Okay,
are
you
okay,
I
mean
I'm
happy
to
finish
yours
first,
so
you
you
did
to
the
ministry
still
I'll
eventually
get
to
the
ethics
commissioner
or
the
Privacy.
Commissioner.
Pardon
me,
you
talked
about
a
bit
of
a
jurisdictional
scan,
and
so
you
talked
about
the
gdpr,
but
there
wasn't
a
lot
of
details
in
there
and
so
I'm
I'm
curious
to
know
you
know
again.
N
G
N
O
So
to
that
end
it
has
lead
to
has
led
to
a
strengthening
of
enforcement
oversight,
so
they've
they've
put
in
the
controls
to
try
and
get
the
organizations
to
ensure
that
they're
acting
responsibly
and
accountably
when
they're
carrying
out
their
data
processing
activities
and
then
they've,
given
the
Commissioners
adequate
enforcement
to
ensure
that
those
those
are
complied
with.
And
you
may
be
aware
that
in
Europe
and
in
Quebec
there
are
now
administrative
monetary
penalties,
because
I
think
that
it
has
been
recognized
that
the
the
self
regulation
model
has
not
been
successful.
O
And
you
know,
as
I
indicated
in
my
speech,
there
is
actually
a
d
incentivization
to
compliance,
because
there
are
no
consequences
and
if
you're
actually
evaluating
your
risk
on
Enterprise
risk
Matrix,
it
becomes
a
low
priority.
So
the
the
laws
are
changing
now
to
ensure
that
that
organizations
are
acting
responsibly.
There
is
good
deterrence
there
to
prevent
breaches
or
inappropriate
activities,
so
it
really
has
been
sort
of
an
evolution
of
one
and
then
another.
At
the
same
time,.
G
And
should
we
just
last
comment
here
and
then
I'm
I'm
I
will
pass
around,
but
should
we,
you
know,
as
part
of
a
jurisdictional
scan,
look
at
this
I'm
very
curious
to
hear
what
other
jurisdictions
have
done
as
far
as
not
just
imposing
administrative
penalties,
but
also
where
what's
the
threshold
of
what's
reasonable?
And
so
you
know
an
example
is
if
you're,
if
you're
about
to
charge
a
company,
I
was
going
to
use
an
example,
but
I
don't
want
to
slander
any
companies.
G
You
know
a
penalty
of
a
thousand
dollars
or
something
to
that
effect,
I
mean
if
it's
an
SME,
maybe
that's
significant.
If
it's
a
multinational
you're
not
going
to
I,
don't
think
you're
going
to
get
compliance
when
if
a
company
is
has
a
bottom
line
in
the
billions
and
you're
you're
charging,
something
that's
that's.
You
know
peanuts
for
them
so
anyway,
just
hope
that
that
will
be
part
of
the
conversation
as
well
moving
forward.
Okay,.
D
A
D
So,
given
that
context,
I
actually
have
a
bit
of
a
fundamental
question
than
more
specific
ones
and
I
I
wonder
whether
having
a
Pippa
in
Alberta
as
separate
from
papita
federally
is.
Has
that
provided
us
any
greater
strength
in
responding
to
these
issues?
Given
that
it's
an
international
issue,
should
we
be
relying
on
federal
governments.
E
O
I
think,
what's
important
to
to
realize
is
that,
yes,
there
is
there's
a
number
of
things
happening
around
the
world
and
in
Canada
and
they're
all
influencing
each
other
to
a
certain
degree.
I
think
that
the
real
value
of
Alberta
having
its
own
Pepa
is
is
twofold.
The
first
is
it
really
allows
the
ability
to
address
what's
happening
locally
here
in
Alberta.
O
You
know
looking
at
what
government
priorities
are
or
Health
Care
custodians
Ambitions-
and
you
know
the
private
sector
here
in
Alberta
and
and
building
a
law
to
to
support
the
Innovation
and
use
of
technology
to
innovate,
but
making
sure
that
there's
inadequate
amount
of
protections
for
albertans
as
part
of
that
equation.
And
yes,
you
will
draw
on
what's
going
around
internationally,
particularly
because
of
whatever
the
Privacy
Law
becomes
at
the
federal
level's
potential
enforcement
in
the
province,
and
you
know
that
law
is
is
actually
it's
a
consider.
O
But
it's
really
grounded
in
consumer
protection
because
of
it's
it's
under
the
trade
and
commerce
power
of
the
federal
government,
so
a
slightly
different
than
what
we
would
be
looking
at
I
think
here
in
Alberta
plus.
It
only
applies
to
the
the
private
sector
that
are
engaged
in
commercial
activities
as
where
you
know
now,
especially
now
that
we're
looking
at
the
kind
of
data
sharing
environment
that's
occurring
in
Alberta.
O
H
O
Also
protects
employee
data,
employee
data,
so
the
epipeta
does
not
apply
to
employee
data,
so
that's
protected
under
pipa
plus.
The
commissioner
has
stronger
enforcement
Powers.
We
have
order
making
powers
that
the
the
federal
commissioner
does
not
have.
The
last
thing,
I
will
say
is
that
it's
operated
out
of
Ottawa
and-
and
they
just
simply
can't
know,
what's
going
on
the
ground
here
and
this
this
I
experienced
when
I
was
in
Yukon.
O
You
know
they
had
no
idea
what
was
happening
in
my
jurisdiction
and-
and
you
know
I
was
you
know,
calling
them
up
to
say
this
thing's
going
on
here.
That
need
to
be
addressed.
So
you
know
I
would
say
that
Pippa
is
essential
for
Alberta
in
order
to
move
it
move
ahead
with
its
economic
interests
and
also
for
the
adequate
protection
of
albertans
and
I'll
pass
it
over
to
Maureen.
D
Please
do
answer,
but
let
me
just
fill
in
some
of
the
concerns.
I've
had
I
mean
you
mentioned,
for
example,
a
couple
of
very
well-known
public
issues
with
the
Tim
Hortons
and
with
a
Cadillac,
Fairview
and
I
guess.
I
just
wondered
whether
I
also
heard
through
your
presentations
that
there's
you
know
a
lot
of
concern
about
remedies
that
were
available
in
fines
of
being
inadequate
and
so
on.
O
O
So
the
way
we
do
that
is
we
investigate
and
we
issue
recommendations
at
the
end
of
it,
because
that
is
sort
of
our
respective
ability
to
do,
though,
as
a
collection
of
Commissioners
doing
investigations.
However,
the
purpose
of
our
involvement
in
that
is
to
protect
the
personal
information
of
albertans.
That's
what
we're
there
for
and
if,
for
example,
one
of
the
organizations
that
we
made
recommendations
to
as
part
of
that
enforcement
does
not
comply
with
our
investigation.
O
D
Well,
I
was
just
wondering
whether
or
not
we
we
actually
had
abilities
to
pursue
either
remedies
or
or
enforcement
because
of
the
pipa
I
feel
like
you've
answered
that
and
and
I
just
was
wondering
about
the
specific
examples
of
Tim
Hortons
and
Cadillac
Fairview.
Was
there
something
more?
We
were
able
to
do
as
a
result
of
being
in
these
situations,
we're
in
here
with
a
separate
Act.
N
Will
just
Echo
I
think
it's
important
that
Alberta
have
its
own
privacy
legislation?
That's
why
we're
being
so
careful
in
watching,
so
that
we
have
that.
You
know
similarly
substantive,
so
that
we
can
retain
that
and
right
now
Alberta
does
have
great
enforcement
Powers
with
the
federal
piece.
The
Canadian
privacy
commissioner
only
makes
recommendations
that
it's
more
of
an
ombudsman
model.
So
if
you
do
have
more
Powers
right
now
in
Alberta
and
that's
very
important
for
because
we
do
want
to
protect
the
privacy
of
albertans,
okay.
B
K
Small
business
owners
are
challenged
in
many
things
and
they
may
many
sacrifices
and
I'm
just
wondering
if
there's
things
in
the
act
that
you've
observed
that
the
cost
benefit.
While
we
want
to
protect
albertan's
privacy
from
abuse
and
inappropriate
uses,
are
there
things
in
the
act
that
the
cost
of
compliance
is
higher
than
the
incremental
benefit.
O
However,
we've
we've
moved
down
the
Spectrum
quite
a
bit
they
you
know.
Businesses
are
looking
to
leverage
technology
to
improve
their
businesses.
Their
marketing
I
think
I
heard
on
the
radio
not
too
long
ago
that
one
retailer
was
using
some
sort
of
facial
recognition,
technology
and
I
think
we
we
already
learned
that
with
Cadillac
Fairview.
So
it's
a
hard
question
to
answer,
because
you
know
there
is
a
cost
to
compliance
and,
and
that
doesn't
mean
that
it's
an
astronomical
cost.
O
It's
it's
very
scalable
to
the
organization
and
I
think
that's
one
of
the
the
foundations
on
which
Pippa
was
built.
So
you
know:
every
organization
today
has
to
protect
the
personal
information
of
its
its
customers
simply
to
to
be
successful
in
business,
never
mind
Pippa,
you
know,
I,
think
we've
moved
pretty
far
down
the
spectrum
of
the
early
days
of
privacy
legislation
where
it
was
not
well
understood,
and
now
we've
seen
the
harms
that
can
come
to
individuals
as
a
result
of
a
failure
to
implement
proper
systems.
O
So
with
that
in
mind,
every
business
is
going
to
have
to
put
into
a
level
of
security.
If
it's
going
to
be
collecting
personal
information
for
its
own
purposes,
then
it
has
a
duty
to
protect
that
information
and
I
think
what
what
has
happened
is
there
is
not
any
cost
to
non-compliance
other
than
in
Alberta.
There
is
some
protection
because
of
the
order
making
power
of
the
commissioner.
So
if
an
organization
is
collecting
information
that
is
simply
not
allowed
to
collect,
the
commissioner
can
say
requiring
to
destroy
that
information.
O
P
Other
than
just
to
reiterate
that
paper
was
introduced
to
address
small
and
medium-sized
businesses,
because
Pippa
to
the
federal
legislation
was
written
more
for
the
larger
Banks
and
federal
works
and
undertakings
and
such
so.
The
the
the
goal
was
to
make
it
a
reasonable
piece
of
legislation
for
small
and
and
medium-sized
businesses,
and
and
hence
why
the
purpose
of
the
ACT
is
the
balancing
between
the
need
to
protect
personal
information
and
the
reasonable
needs
of
an
organization
to
have
collect,
use
and
disclose
personal
information
for
for
appropriate
business
purposes.
K
Yeah
I
I
do
you
know
and
I
appreciate
the
fact
that
you
have
lived
working
experience
with
this
important
legislation
if
you
could,
over
your
experience
with
Pippa
working
with
both
the
public
and
those
Enterprises
and
organizations
that
collect
personal
private
information,
if
there
were
say
two
key
changes
that
you
would
suggest
to
improve
this
legislation
to
make
it
either
more
protective
help,
businesses
and
organizations
be
more
competitive
either
on
those
ends
of
the
Continuum.
What
would
you
suggest.
O
Well
that
that's
to
that's
a
complicated
answer,
because
you
know
the
environment
has
changed
substantially
since
Pippa
was
was
brought
into
Force
back
in
2004,
and
you
know,
in
order
for
businesses
to
actually
innovate
through
the
use
of
technology,
which
is
is
where
we're
going
and
largely
where
we're
at
there
has
to
be
a
number
of
changes
put
into
to
Pepa
to
ensure
that
that
balance
is
struck.
So
the
adequate
controls
are
in
place
to
control
it
and
there's
adequate
enforcement.
O
I
think
I
think
that
I
mentioned
earlier
that
there
was
there
was
no
incentive
to
compliance
really
so
I
think
one
of
the
reasons
why
we're
seeing
the
the
laws
changing
and
moving
to
administrative
monetary
penalties
is
not
because
anybody
wants
to
be
doling
out
penalties.
It's
because
there
needs
to
be
a
real
deterrence
to
non-compliance.
L
Yes,
good
morning,
I'd
like
to
thank
the
committee
for
coming
today
and
presenting
the
information
to
us.
I
wanted
to
talk
about
slide.
Nine
of
the
presentation
mentions
that
Pippa
is
falling
behind
and
creating
privacy
risks
as
organizations
further
digitize
their
operations.
Can
you
comment
on
some
of
the
specific
areas
where
digitization
is
creating
privacy
risks.
O
Well,
any
any
time
you
start
looking
at
the
use
of
algorithmic
decision
making
can
result
in
in
bias
simply
by
the
design
and
deployment
of
that
kind
of
Technology.
So,
and
it
is
happening,
it's
it's
happening
in
many
platforms.
I
think
you
know
everybody
has
is
familiar
with
Facebook
and
Google
and
all
of
those
things
and
and
being
delivered
ads,
etc,
etc.
O
All
of
that
is
is
actually
happening,
but
what
we're
seeing
now
is
it's
trickling
down
into
different
kinds
of
services:
delivery
in
the
small
and
medium
sector
as
well
in
the
public
and
health
sector,
and
there's
obvious
benefits
to
the
public
for
for
some
of
those
things
to
occur.
But
there
needs
to
be
proper
controls
put
in
place
to
ensure
individuals
are
protected
and
Quebec
has
quite
a
number
of
examples
of
how
they've
actually
done
that
drawing
on
the
gdpr,
for
example,.
L
N
Thank
you
so
yeah,
so
we've
been
looking
at
a
number
of
jurisdictions
like
I
mentioned
before
Quebec
they've
done
they've
done
some
work
around
defining
terms
around
different
types
of
data.
That's
very
useful
for
Citizens
they've
also
come
in
with
a
consent,
age,
so
14
being
that
age,
but
I'm
very
happy
to
provide
those
details
in
in
a
written
submission,
because
I
think
that
will
give
you
more
details
that
you're
looking
for
so
that
works
for
the
committee.
We
will
do
that.
D
D
A
N
D
D
N
D
Lot
of
this,
of
course,
is
then,
is
going
to
be.
You
know
and
we're
going
to
wait
to
see
what
the
changes
are
that
are
recommended
through
all
these
other
through
Quebec
or
the
gdpr,
and
and
and
hope
we'll
adopt
a
lot
of
them.
I'm.
Wondering
then
do
we
need
to
also
spend
some
time
looking
at
not
just
the
aspects
of
what
is
covered
under
a
Peppa,
but
rather
the
the
mechanisms
of
enforcement
and
follow-up
I'm
concerned.
D
First
of
all
that
we
may
not
have
appropriate
administrative
and
monetary
penalties
and,
and
then
even
more
so,
do
we
have
the
ability
to
assess
whether
or
not
there
has
been
substantive
compliance.
If
we
say
You
must
erase
all
this
data,
can
we
actually
guarantee
that
a
company
has
indeed
erased
the
data
and
I
guess
I
just
want
to
know
it
as
we
gather
more
information
and
start
to
make
changes
in
the
ACT?
Do
we
actually
need
to
create
some
more
enhancement
in
these
areas
of
enforcement
and
Remediation
yeah.
N
And
one
of
the
things
that,
through
the
work
of
the
gdpr,
there
are
a
lot
of
elements
that
were
introduced.
That
countries
found
it
very
difficult
to
comply
with.
Just
because
something
is
difficult
doesn't
mean
that
you
shouldn't
aspire
to
it,
but
I
think,
especially
in
Alberta
we're
looking
for
that
balance.
But
we
can
again
we'll
highlight
that
in
the
materials
that
we
submit,
okay,
I.
G
Sure
and
I
appreciate
you
know,
hearing
that
that
we're
looking
at
at
striking
a
balance
and
that
you
know
again,
we
need
to
protect
albertans,
but
we
also
I
mean
you
know
my
colleague
from
Red
yourself
just
talked
about.
You
know
the
the
the
responsibility
that's
laid
on
small
businesses
and
is
it
to
onerous?
Although
you
know
I
do
think
there
needs
to
be
a
balance
and
I
do
think
that
that
you
know,
companies
that
are
engaging
in
digitization
are
using.
N
I'll
speak
to
this
briefly,
one
of
the
things
one
of
the
things
that
we've
heard
from
albertans
as
a
as
a
point
of
frustration
is
and
I
think
we're
all
familiar
with.
You
know
you're
getting
an
app
and
you
get
the
the
consent,
the
Privacy
statement,
and
it
is
pages
and
pages
of
legal
terminology.
So
that's
something
that
we're.
Definitely
you
know
trying
to
to.
O
Yeah
I
think
that
it
is
pretty
well
understood
that
you
know
consent
is
intended
to
be
a
means
by
which
individual
controls
their
information.
But
you
know
often
we
don't
understand
what
it
is
that's
being
asked
of
us
or
that
there's
pages
and
pages
of
legalese
that
we
have
to
get
through
to
understand
it.
O
G
That's
one
more
question
than
just
a
comment.
The
question,
and
maybe
today
is
not
the
the
time
or
place
as
as
the
committee
continues
to
explore
this
further,
but
I
am
curious
to
hear
from
you,
commissioner.
As
far
as
you
know,
do
you
the
the
job
that
you
have
is
is
quite
broad,
and
we
were
talking
about.
G
You
know,
since
the
Inception
that
3000
reviews,
and
so
at
some
point,
I'm
curious
to
know
or
to
hear,
if,
if
you
feel
that
your
office
has
adequate
tools,
if
you
are
adequately
resourced
to
be
able
to
do
your
job
to
protect
albertans
and
I
appreciate.
This
is
not
a
review
of
of
the
budget
of
this
office,
but
I
think
the
conversation
around
the
important
work
that
you
do
and
you
know
are
we
falling
behind
just
because
of
of
inadequate
resources.
O
But
there
are
a
lot
of
businesses
in
this
province,
and,
and
so
it
will
take
some
really
strategic
thinking
as
to
how
we're
going
to
reach
them
all.
And
of
course,
we
have
been
in
conversation
with
the
government
about
some
of
these
initiatives
from
their
initiatives
so
that
we're
sort
of
sort
of
thinking
about
some
of
these
issues
together.
G
The
other
comment
I
want
to
make
is
just
the
the
opportunity
that
I
think
we
have
before
us.
When
we
look
at-
and
commissioner,
you
touched
on
just
health
information
and
and
privacy
I
think
you
know,
and
I
heard
this
all
of
the
time
when
we
were
in
government
as
far
as
the
opportunity
that
Alberta
has,
because
we
are
the
only
jurisdiction
on
the
planet
that
has
a
single
Healthcare
delivery
mechanism,
and
so
that
data
is
is
sought
after
by
every
single
company.
G
That's
in
that
space,
and
is
there
a
way
to
ensure
that
we're
protecting
the
privacy
of
albertans,
but
also
you
know,
taking
advantage
or
making
use
of
the
fact
that
we
have
this
incredible
data
that
could
help
Drive
patient
outcomes
and
improve
our
Health
Care
system
and
drive
down
costs.
I
mean
the
solutions
all
exist
within
our
borders.
It's
a
matter
of
finding
a
way
to
ensure
that
that
data
is
used.
G
You
know
for
a
very
naive
way
of
framing
it
for
good
and
used
here
in
Alberta,
and
so
you
know
my
hope
is
in
the
course
of
this
review.
If
there's
a
way
to
help,
you
know
the
government
be
able
to
navigate
that,
then
I
think
there's
a
real
opportunity
and
a
real
win
for
albertans
outside
of
protecting
data
and
their
privacy.
G
B
B
A
B
With
that,
we
will
proceed
to
agenda
item
five,
C
and
and
I
think
we
have
laid
some
pretty
good
groundwork
as
to
having
good
discussions
with
regards
to
research
requests,
the
committee
will
consider
whether
it
wishes
to
direct
Lao
Research
Services
to
prepare
any
reports
related
to
our
review
of
the
personal
information
protection
act
committee.
Members
may
be
aware
that
presently,
the
House
of
Commons
has
a
bill
before
it
entitled
bill
c27.
B
As
we
heard
an
act
to
enact
the
consumer
privacy
protection
act,
the
personal
information
and
data
protection
tribunal
Act
and
the
artificial
intelligence
and
data
Act.
This
bill
proposes
to
make
changes
to
the
federal
legislation
that
deals
with
protection
of
personal
information.
As
there
are
substantial
proposals
being
made
in
Bill
c-27,
the
committee
may
wish
to
consider
directing
Research
Services
to
prepare
an
emerging
issues
document
that
describes
the
proposed
changes
to
the
federal
legislation
and
other
emerging
issues.
I
will
now
open
the
floor
to
a
discussion
on
this
matter.
B
C
Turton,
thank
you
very
much.
Mr
chair
and
I'd
like
to
put
forth
the
emotion
based
upon
that
Preamble
I
moved
at
the
standing
committee
on
Alberta's
economic
future
direct
Research
Services
to
prepare
a
document
identifying
emerging
issues
related
to
the
personal
information
protection
act,
including
proposed
changes
to
Federal
statutes
and
Bill
c-27,
and
act
to
enact
the
consumer
privacy
protection
act.
The
personal
information
and
data
protection
tribunal
act
and
their
artificial
intelligence
and
data
act
and
once
again,
it's
right
up
there,
which
is
just
amazing.
So
thank.
D
D
I'm
also
particularly
interested,
not
just
in
the
the
nature
of
the
authorities
of
the
ACT,
but
also
the
resourcing
of
of
the
Department
I
guess
it
would
be
so
that
we
can
ensure
that
we
have
appropriate
resources
for
compliance,
monitoring
and
and
employment
of
Remedies
and
those
kinds
of
things,
and
perhaps
it's
something
that
I
should
add
as
a
separate
motion
or
rather
than
include
a
bit
more
in
this
one,
or
perhaps
it's
just
an
explanation
that
can
be
attached
in
our
in
our
files.
Yes,.
B
B
The
the
resourcing
for
an
office
of
the
the
legislative
one
of
our
legislative
offices,
I,
would
suggest
possibly
should
be
considered
as
an
item
that
we
deal
with
through
our
committee
of
legislative
offices
to
ensure
that
that
the
officer
is
a
question
queried.
Whether
or
not
the
resources
are
adequate.
B
B
D
No
I,
you
know
I
guess
I
feel
like
I'm
on
the
record
that
I'm
concerned
not
simply
about
the
authorities,
but
also
the
implementation
and
and
you're
right
that
that
may
be
best
handled
under
some
other
committees.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
when
they
do
the
review
that
they're
looking
at
issues
across
jurisdictionally
and
so
on,
about
the
the
nature
of
of
ensuring
compliance
and
enforcement
and
the
types
of
penalties
that
are
available,
but.
D
H
Turn
thank
you.
Mr,
chair
and
I
was
I
was
just
going
to
note.
Mr
turd
might
be
able
to
provide
some
comments
on
on
what
that
means
in
terms
of
emerging
issues,
but
I,
would
you
know
with
my
my
legal
hat
on
and
looking
at
that?
How
I
would
read
that
is
just
to
provide
a
little
bit
of
leeway,
because
this
is
a
proposed
piece
of
legislation.
So,
of
course,
this
is
not
a
final
actor.
G
I
That
thank
you,
Mr,
chair,
yes
and
I.
Think
I
think
the
reason
the
motion
was
written.
The
way
that
it
was
is,
it
says,
including
proposed
changes,
so
so
it
can
and
I
suspect,
will
include
emerging
issues
with
respect
to
the
gdpr
and
Quebec
and
then
I
I
think
coming
the
chairs
referred
or
let
let
members
know
that
another
possible
motion
could
come
forward
separate
from
this
with
respect
to
across
jurisdictional
on
existing
legislation.
Okay,.
C
Is
a
final
comment:
I
just
wanted
to
keep
it
as
as
open
as
possible,
based
upon
the
fluid
situation
on
the
federal
scene
and
I
mean
it
would
be
my
expectation
that,
especially
after
the
next
motion
is
done
as
well,
that
all
the
issues
that
member
fian
talked
about
that
would
be
addressed
encapsulated
with
a
document.
That's
gonna
be
coming
forth,
so.
B
B
B
G
I
I,
like
this
motion,
I
just
want
to
ensure
that
it's
clear
that
the
cross
jurisdictional
scan
is
is
not
limited
to
to
Canada.
We
have
obviously
identified
the
European
Union
I'm,
also
very
curious
to
our
neighbors
in
the
South
as
far
as
some
of
their
laws
when
it
comes
to
privacy
and
personal
information.
I
Thanks
Mr
chair:
yes,
it
certainly
is
not
limited
to
won't
be
limited
to
Canada.
I
would
say
just
the
way
that
legislation
is
drafted.
The
gdpr
is
is
definitely
I,
think
it's
considered
the
gold
standard.
If
I'm
understanding
my
the
research
team
correctly
and
I
think
the
UK
Parliament
is
also
redoing,
redoing,
theirs
and
now.
I
C
C
Thank
you
and
I
appreciate
the
comments.
My
member
billis,
so
perhaps
like
I
would
be
willing
to
accept
a
friendly
Amendment
just
to
make
sure
that
the
items
that
he
talked
about
in
terms
of
the
no
that's
on
compass
as
long
as
you
all
know
that,
because
I
support,
obviously
the
spirit
of
what
a
member
bills
was
talking
about.
So.
G
As
far
as
the
U.S
legislation
and
I
just
wanted
to
ensure
that
we're
not
missing
other
best
practices
that
exist
down
south
to
us,
not
just
in
the
European
Union,
was
that
the
the
premise
behind
that,
but
again
I
also
don't
want
to
overwhelm
Research
Services
with
giving
you
basically
a
global
scan
that
may
not
result
in
anything
in
new.
Coming
back
so
I
mean
I'm
happy
to
defer
to
Research
Services
to
to
make
that
determination.
Okay,.
B
Thank
you,
I
I
do
believe
that
it's
not
out
of
order
to
having
heard
from
the
commissioner
with
regards
to
European
Union
regulation,
we've
heard
with
regard
to
Quebec
legislation,
we've
heard
also
with
regards
to
California
legislation
in
the
presentation,
so
I
don't
I,
do
not
believe
that
it's
out
of
outside
of
the
scope.
It
may
just
be
a
difficulty
on
on
the
structure
how
it's
able
to
be
reported
back
if
I'm
hearing
parliamentary
Council
correctly.
B
Yeah,
so
we
in
in
consideration
of
the
fact
that
we
we
are
doing
research
that
encompasses
work,
that's
being
done
by
the
commissioner
by
the
ministry
and
Research
Services
I
have
asked
the
clerk
to
prepare
a
motion
to
try
and
get
some
cooperation.
Voluntary
cooperation
amongst
those
entities
in
the
the
research
work
that's
necessary
here.
So
if,
if
the
clerk
could
put
that
up
on
the
screen,
it
would
be
a
motion
that
would
be
for
consideration
by
members
if,
if
they
see
fit
to
make
that
motion.
B
So
this
is
been
standard
practice
in
other
reviews
as
well.
So
it's
not
something
that's
all
of
a
sudden
coming
out
of
the
blue,
but
it
it
does
the
where
the
where
the
the
committee
is
requesting,
that
these
officials
work
in
conjunction
with
the
Legislative
Assembly
staff
and
so
provides
an
opportunity
for
a
good
collaboration
and
cooperation
in
in
the
research
that's
necessary.
B
D
B
B
F
Now,
then,
absolutely
so
again,
I
moved
at
the
standing
committee
on
Alberta's
economic
future
direct
Research
Services
to
create
a
draft
draft
list
of
stakeholders
in
relation
to
its
review
of
the
Pippa
for
review
at
an
upcoming
meeting
of
the
committee
and
so
again,
I
think
it's
important
that
we
allow
stakeholders
to
bring
forward
their
thoughts
and
their
research
on
this
as
well,
and
so
hopefully,
we'll
see.
The
committee
accept
that.
Thank
you.
F
B
H
B
B
B
Seen
and
hearing
none,
we
will
move
on
to
item
number
seven
date
of
the
next
meeting.
The
next
meeting
will
be
at
the
call
of
the
chair.
So
with
that
any
comments
with
regards
to
next
meeting
hearing
and
seeing
none
item
number
eight
adjournment.
If
there's
nothing
else
for
the
committee's
consideration,
I'll
call
for
a
motion
to
adjourn,
moved
Emily
McIver
moves
that
the
January
10
2023
meeting
of
the
standing
committee
on
Alberta's
economic
future
be
adjourned
all
those
in
favor
in
the
online
all
right
all.