Surveillance assault in Canada
p2p news / p2pnet:- Below is the forward to post from Jennifer Stoddart, Canada`s privacy commissioner, on her official government web site.
It speaks for itself >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Dear Mr Speaker:
I have the honour to submit to Parliament the Annual Report of the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada on the Privacy Act for the period from April 1, 2004 to March 31, 2005.
Yours sincerely,
Jennifer Stoddart
Privacy Commissioner of Canada
October 2005
If Canada had optimal privacy protection, the Annual Reports from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner would be a detailed account of successful interventions to protect the rights of individuals, of audits of well run federal institutions with mature business processes incorporating privacy requirements, and a thorough policy analysis of new information systems and technologies. Instead, reports from this office have too often lamented the steady erosion of rights and the assault of new surveillance technologies on the daily lives of Canadians, and our impotence to reverse the trends.
This year is no exception. Increasingly, the phenomenon of outsourcing and public-private partnerships means the data of Canadians may be in the hands of the private sector even when under the control of the government.
We are generally pleased with the results of our interventions, and with the cooperation of business and government alike to try to comply with fair information practices and legal requirements, but the privacy threats seem to be multiplying like a bad virus, threatening to overwhelm us.
If there is one central message we want to convey this year, it is that we are not going to allow that to happen. We mean business, and we are counting on the support of all institutions to help us grapple with these issues and preserve and maintain the privacy of the individuals in this country.
Canadians are anxious, and they expect us to enforce the law and their government to respect the values inherent in our Constitution, as recent polling data shows. We will do our part, but the defence of these fundamental rights of information protection demands a shift in public policy such as has started to take place with respect to the environmental movement. Over the last twenty years it has become well accepted that it is not alright to pollute, that it is expected behaviour to recycle. We need the same thing to happen with respect to personal information: it is not alright to gather information without consent, it is not alright to share it promiscuously, it is not alright to hide your information practices from your public.
Three main themes will be found throughout this report, because they are the most significant issues we have faced: security and the voracious appetite for personal information and surveillance that has sprung up in the post-911 environment, sharing of information and outsourcing of data operations across borders, and the need to modernize our Privacy Act. Whether you read this report as an individual member of the public, a public servant, or a Parliamentarian, there is a message we want to convey to you:
Start caring about privacy now, before it is too late. Citizens’ involvement in the debate will determine the course our country takes with regard to the protection of personal information. Do your part to control the flow of everyone’s personal information. We are here to help, but we cannot do the job alone.
======================
Something you think we should know? tips[at]p2pnet.net
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win
- Mohandas Gandhi
October 8th, 2005 at 2:37 am
These whole public+private “partnerships” must be stopped. Why? Because there’s a private company involved, any attempt to find out what’s going on can be blocked by the company citing “commercially sensitive information” concerns. If that doesn’t work, the govt can also apply their usual tactics also.
It means the private partner can shield the govt partner from scrutiny and the govt partner can shield the private partner from scrutiny using different methods and reasons. It’s called a “layered defense” and is similar to the concept of a using antivirus and firewall software on the same pc. Each one works against a different kind of “threat”, improving security overall.
This is the sole reason for these “partnerships” of course. To “legally” make it impossible for anyone other than the bureaucrats or exec’s in charge, to find out what’s actually going on. Makes you wonder why they’d go to so much trouble to keep everything so secret doesn’t it? Is it just they all get their rocks off by keeping secrets, or are they worried what their voters would think, and do, if they found out the truth?
October 9th, 2005 at 2:18 pm
They would probably end up arresting the person,if they found out the truth.The governments and private sectors have their ways of making ppl be quiet in the new dubbed “Big brother” era. The government is trying to find ways to save their own butts without ppl knowing which is called corrupted power.When they take away your privacy watch what you say because your own opinions will be used against you and get you thrown in jail.
Let’s fight this big brother mentality!Let’s fight for our future and NOT the governments big brother future
October 9th, 2005 at 3:24 pm
yeah right canada could not organize a piss-up in a brewry!!!!!!!
October 9th, 2005 at 5:16 pm
This is a very serious issue. There is unquestionably a proliferation of commercial activity which erodes personal privacy in Canada, particularly in the banking and finance sectors. These areas are poorly regulated and need particular attention.
But far and away, the biggest privacy offenders are governments and governmental institutions. Enforcement and intelligence-gathering agencies, operating in the psychotic “psuedo-security” envoirnment of post-9-1-1, have declared open season on Canadians’ privacy and personal information. They are unwilling to accept restraint of any kind, and as recently evidenced by the report of the office overseeing the RCMP, simply ignore any weak rules that might inconvenience them. They believe, with much justification, that these rules were not intended to work anyway.
Governments have no strong committment to privacy. They ignore or excuse every abuse, and move only in tiny baby steps when facing great pressure. The media is worse. If its not commercial and profitable, they don’t care about it. It is up to Canadians themselves to demand better, more effective privacy laws, with painful, personally damaging consequences for those who ignore or abuse them, in letter or in spirit. Let’s get behind the Privacy Commissioner and make it happen.
And to the moderator: I am not a coward. I am just trying to protect my privacy. Your web-site should respect that a lot more. Comments and thinking like this are a big part of the privacy problem.