Canadian Government Investigates Accidental Deletion of Privacy Clause

The federal government of Canada is currently addressing the accidental removal of a critical privacy provision from its Online Streaming Act. This revision was brought to light by Michael Geist, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, who noted that the privacy clause was eliminated just two months after the legislation was officially enacted in April 2023. The deletion occurred through an amendment included in a separate bill.

A spokesperson from the Department of Canadian Heritage confirmed the situation, stating, “We have recently been made aware of what appears to be an inadvertent oversight in a coordinating amendment and are looking into it.” Geist interpreted this response as an acknowledgment of a governmental error, emphasizing the gravity of the mistake. “Given the importance of privacy, it is the type of mistake that just can’t happen and which needs to be fixed as soon as possible,” he remarked in an email.

Details of the Legislative Oversight

The Online Streaming Act was designed to modernize Canada’s Broadcasting Act by extending regulations to platforms such as Netflix. An important amendment, introduced by Sen. Julie Miville-Déchêne at the suggestion of the federal privacy commissioner, had established that the Act would be interpreted in alignment with individuals’ rights to privacy. Miville-Déchêne expressed her disappointment regarding the oversight, stating, “I’m a bit surprised because I thought there were many levels of verification. But, you know, mistakes happen. I think now the question is that it has to be corrected quickly.”

The misstep occurred when the government passed an official languages bill two months after the Online Streaming Act took effect. This bill contained a section that altered language pertaining to official language minority communities within the streaming legislation. Unfortunately, instead of amending a similar provision, it replaced the privacy clause entirely. Consequently, the current version of the streaming bill features two provisions related to linguistic communities, while lacking any reference to privacy.

Implications for Privacy Law in Canada

In response to concerns regarding this legislative gap, the spokesperson from the Heritage Department asserted that both public and private-sector privacy laws continue to govern the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) and broadcasters. “Those regimes apply regardless of the interpretive provisions in the Broadcasting Act,” the spokesperson stated.

However, Miville-Déchêne contested this argument, pointing out that if the privacy commissioner had previously indicated a need for reinforced privacy measures, it suggested that existing laws may not suffice. Geist echoed this sentiment, noting that the now-deleted clause was essential for ensuring that the Broadcasting Act aligned with Canadian privacy law, which is a different matter altogether.

Monica Auer, executive director of the Forum for Research and Policy in Communications, added that the absence of a privacy provision complicates the interpretation process for courts. “The courts are bound to interpret what Parliament writes, and they have to presume that Parliament knows what it’s doing,” she explained.

The government is expected to act swiftly to amend the legislation and restore the privacy safeguards that were inadvertently removed. The issue underscores the critical importance of privacy in an increasingly digital landscape, particularly as streaming services continue to grow in popularity.

This report by the Canadian Press was first published on August 29, 2025.