Michael Geist provides a badly needed update on the status of Canada’s do-not-call legislation, or as he presciently puts it, Canada’s do-not-hesitate-to-call list. It looks like he is knee deep in the outrage I hoped for when I blogged this in May after an article by Tyler Hamilton in the Star.
All of this has been bubbling away well beneath the public consciousness, a perfect opportunity for the well-heeled and well-connected to do their business. What’s needed now, apart from more outrage, is the disinfecting power of a little transparency. Gist from Michael’s post (I would not ordinarily quote so extensively fro someone else’s work but in this case I see its dissemination as, well, a public service):
My weekly Lawbytes column focuses on Bill C-37, which is designed to establish a do-not-call list. Following its introduction, Bill C-37 was referred to the Standing Committee on Industry, Natural Resources, Science and Technology for review. Months later, the amended bill is virtually unrecognizable, as intense lobbying has transformed the do-not-call list into the do-not-hesitate-to-call list.
Rather than leaving the specific exemptions to an open public consultation, the committee introduced several changes to the bill that dramatically reduces its effectiveness. These include exceptions for charities, political parties, polling companies, and businesses with existing business relationships. While it may come as little surprise to find politicians protecting their own ability to make unsolicited telemarketing calls, the inclusion of the existing business relationship exception is particularly damaging as it renders the do-not-call list practically useless.
…
Not only is the new Bill C-37 a disappointing departure from the government’ s prior commitment to an effective do-not-call list, the committee hearings were also particularly embarrassing. While the bill is ostensibly designed to protect consumers, the committee refused to hear from consumer groups. Instead, with notable exception of government officials and the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (whose advice was largely ignored), the committee limited its hearings to a steady stream of marketing and charitable groups.
I conclude by noting that since Bill C-37 has not yet become law, it is not too late to restore an effective do-not-call approach by reversing the committee’ s proposed do-not-hesitate-to call list. The time has come for Canadians to speak out on the issue by delivering a few unsolicited calls of their own to Industry Minister David Emerson and their local Member of Parliament.
Note that the quote contains a link to Michael’s article in the Toronto Star on the topic.
Final point – I haven’t seen anything at all in the Globe on this story – have they been AWOL or have I missed their coverage?
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
I have written to Emersons’ office but was dusted off by a fairly snooty type, and got the impression they do not want to be disturbed, so I sent the next letter to the PM. What bothered me is that so far from a do not call list it has been turned upside down to guarantee the “right” of various groups to bother us at the dinner hour, just as the writer you cite has said. If the big media is freezing out genuine news on that they are even worse than I thought. The people who should be available to raise the issue have perhaps themselves been influenced by getting on the list as well, like political parties.
The resulting position is just not tolerable: no one has a right to abuse the whole population through systematic trespass, for that is what it is. A statute protected privilege to trespass against personal privacy
amounts to the legalization of a tort.
That’s my thinking exactly, Garry – I don’t understand why “just say no” doesn’t seem to be enough in this case. Our elected representatives ought to allow us to control who has the right to intrude on our lives.
If you have it handy, could you post the addresses you used to write to Emerson and the PMO?
The Minister’s address is : Hon. David Emerson, Min. Dept of Industry And Trade, House of Commons, Ottawa, KIA 0A6
If you read the bill as amended, it is quite startling to see how far into reverse the Committee has gone, how little a number of the members speaking have understood the issues, and most unhappy of all, how completely they are responsive to what they are being told. Transcript of deliberations is available through the Fed.Gov Website, The Canada Site. Emerson’s butler stiffly informs the citizen that the tradesmen’s entrance is at the rear, and they only see the poor on Wednesdays, that is, the committee is fiinished and after the bill is returned to the House the citizen may comment on some future occasion.