Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Trudeau more unpopular than popular for the first time since election: survey


tbone909

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Why has this been so quiet?   I would have thought this would have the Canadian masses up in arms irrespective of party background.   This seems like an incredible breach of privacy on a scale not previously seen in Canada.   What is the possible justification?   National Security?

It hasn't really been quiet the conservatives brought it up repeatedly in the hoc. It bothered many Canadians so the privacy commissioner is looking into it. It isn't national security, statscan just wants to use the info for their benefit and sadly but not surprising Trudeau is behind and supporting statscan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Why has this been so quiet?   I would have thought this would have the Canadian masses up in arms irrespective of party background.   This seems like an incredible breach of privacy on a scale not previously seen in Canada.   What is the possible justification?   National Security?

or this is another flashing light headline where the facts turn out to be not so scary. I still haven't found a source on whether or not the data is anonymized that Stats Can receives. If it is, this is a nothing burger, again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

or this is another flashing light headline where the facts turn out to be not so scary. I still haven't found a source on whether or not the data is anonymized that Stats Can receives. If it is, this is a nothing burger, again. 

Even anonymized there is an e-chain Jimmy.  How many "redacted" items in government get "accidentally" exposed.   What purpose can a government have for this that isn't invasion of privacy?   What happened to Census and Polls.   

 

You are a far more trusting guy then me if you think this is a nothing burger.   There is no legitimate reason for this information to be collated.     If they are not able to use the information they already get on income tax returns, then they are just being lazy.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

or this is another flashing light headline where the facts turn out to be not so scary. I still haven't found a source on whether or not the data is anonymized that Stats Can receives. If it is, this is a nothing burger, again. 

Why is the privacy commissioner involved if it's a nothing burger?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Even anonymized there is an e-chain Jimmy.  How many "redacted" items in government get "accidentally" exposed.   What purpose can a government have for this that isn't invasion of privacy?   What happened to Census and Polls.   

 

You are a far more trusting guy then me if you think this is a nothing burger.   There is no legitimate reason for this information to be collated.     If they are not able to use the information they already get on income tax returns, then they are just being lazy.

Furthermore why should the government have access to 500,000 Canadians personal transactions? And it will be 500,000 a year at random. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ryan Strome said:

Furthermore why should the government have access to 500,000 Canadians personal transactions? And it will be 500,000 a year at random. 

This cannot possibly be agreed to by the House when voted on let alone during an election.   I assume there will be a referendum or something on something so "out of left field" in terms of how a democracy like Canada works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

This cannot possibly be agreed to by the House when voted on let alone during an election.   I assume there will be a referendum or something on something so "out of left field" in terms of how a democracy like Canada works.

My question is who actually thinks it doesn't already happen?

 

hell, facebook asked for the same info to far less uproar last year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Even anonymized there is an e-chain Jimmy.  How many "redacted" items in government get "accidentally" exposed.   What purpose can a government have for this that isn't invasion of privacy?   What happened to Census and Polls.   

 

You are a far more trusting guy then me if you think this is a nothing burger.   There is no legitimate reason for this information to be collated.     If they are not able to use the information they already get on income tax returns, then they are just being lazy.

no legitimate reason? how about a clear picture of household debt. Or having benchmarks for what people pay in interest or what services we get for what cost from financial institutions. Of course there are good reasons for the data, jumping to some nefarious purpose is ridiculous - you do know that Revenue Canada already has access to all of this on you right? its just not collated in a way Stats Can could make use of - and make into public data tables for anyone to use btw, thats what they do. 

 

there's no "chain" if the data set is given over or scrubbed for use with no personal identifying info attached, thats how databases work. Its not hard to do. Its how you use census and health data, all of which you can access as a researcher in Canada even down to the individual person level for CIHI data.

 

It is certainly worth debating if people should have the right to consent to provide the info, but as it stands thats not legally required. With your personal info removed there's no harm, at least nothing above what you've already done by applying for a credit card already. 

 

Statistics Canada said the credit information it obtained is aggregated and used for statistical purposes only. It also said all personal identifiers are stripped from its database.

 

By law, Statistics Canada is not obligated to inform individual Canadians whose personal information it obtains from credit bureaus nor is it required to obtain the consent of Canadians, a practice Canada’s privacy commissioner has urged the federal agency to change.

 

https://globalnews.ca/news/4610259/statcan-canadian-personal-credit-bureau-data/

 

Edited by Jimmy McGill
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

C'mon Jimmy, quit throwing cold water on the Trudeau bashing circle jerk....

oh right sorry. The fact is Stats Can legally has access to all kinds of info about you, this is nothing new. 

 

The funny part is the outrage over the government aggregating it for public use, which you can freely use and also is under a privacy watchdog. But they happily give their information to their credit card companies, who sell that to Equifax, who then in turn make money off you, and you have no recourse whatsoever with those companies. But yeah lets have a $&!# fit over Stats Can. 

 

I kind of want to walk them though how CIHI can access their hospital charts.... ah, maybe not. 

 

guys @Rob_Zepp @Ryan Strome you have to realize that if you have a credit card you've already given up this information, and to a private company you have no control over. 

 

Edited by Jimmy McGill
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

My question is who actually thinks it doesn't already happen?

 

hell, facebook asked for the same info to far less uproar last year

 

 

1 hour ago, Rob_Zepp said:

This cannot possibly be agreed to by the House when voted on let alone during an election.   I assume there will be a referendum or something on something so "out of left field" in terms of how a democracy like Canada works.

This is why I am not on Facebook, don’t believe in democracy and won’t fly with dogs.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Warhippy said:

My question is who actually thinks it doesn't already happen?

 

hell, facebook asked for the same info to far less uproar last year

At least they asked. StatsCan didn't. But I do agree with you I don't trust governments of any colour to not already be spying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

At least they asked. StatsCan didn't. But I do agree with you I don't trust governments of any colour to not already be spying.

they didn't have to. I understand that you may not like it, or want a change, but Stats Can followed the law. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...