Conservatives keeping list of Jews

[msj]

This has just been posted on Garth Turner's blog:

Nowhere to hide

[ScottSA]

*yawn*

[jdobbin]

This has just been posted on Garth Turner's blog:

Nowhere to hide

Thanks for this. Turner shows the important difference between the two systems as he is in a position to know.

[betsy]

I think the political agenda of Kofman is to resuscitate the Scary Harper mongering. She sound like a non-Conservative diehard whose loyalty clearly belongs to another party. And I wouldn't be surprised to know that she is on the payroll of that party.

If you received a well-wish card and you want to find out where they got your name, would you go straight to the media?

Wooooh..... scary. Harper knows everything.

You think Kofman is doing it for Haloween?

[betsy]

Never mind the soft approach of sending religious holiday-greeting cards!

What I truly find scary is the NDP/Liberal government's tactics of buying votes.....outright pandering to religious groups!

[Argus]

I'm not sure what you are referring to.

As far as the Liberals go, I believed they should have been charged under the Privacy Act for giving out supporters names to the media and polling companies.

But you weren't on here complaining about it now were you?

[Argus]

Subscriptions and loyalty cards have in the fine print that they provide your information to their advertisers and by applying, you consent to have that information shared.

The fine print? Which almost nobody reads or understands. I don't belong to any loyalty card programs but many, many people are, and few of them have any idea what kinds of lists are being compiled with their names (and addresses) attached. Everything you buy is tracked. For example, are you being solicited by diet products? It could be that a department store loyalty card is tracking the purchase of large sized clothing items so it can supply the names of those buying such close to diet companies. Yes, lists of fat people. Do you buy your drugs at a department store? Do you swipe your card? Well then, you could be on a list of people who have problems with gas, or diarrhea, or dandruff or any of a hundred other ailments - all to be compiled and sent out to drug companies that might want to target you for advertising. Chapters has a loyalty card. That means they can track everything you read. Who has access to that list? In The US they have banned video stores from keeping track of what videos people rent, but there's no such law in Canada.

I find it odd you have this deep concern for privacy rights yet you believe that if somewhere in the fine print it says something ambiguous about lists everything is then okay.

[jdobbin]

But you weren't on here complaining about it now were you?

I hadn't heard about it until way after the convention. I was surprised that it hadn't been mentioned in these forums when everything else was. I think the building of profiles and sharing of information with no provision for exempting yourself is wrong. I think it is wrong when others can sign you up for a mailing and you have no idea who or why it happened.

I have written about privacy on these forums before. You never seemed to have a problem with those comments till now.

Edited October 13, 2007 by jdobbin

[jdobbin]

The fine print? Which almost nobody reads or understands. I don't belong to any loyalty card programs but many, many people are, and few of them have any idea what kinds of lists are being compiled with their names (and addresses) attached. Everything you buy is tracked. For example, are you being solicited by diet products? It could be that a department store loyalty card is tracking the purchase of large sized clothing items so it can supply the names of those buying such close to diet companies. Yes, lists of fat people. Do you buy your drugs at a department store? Do you swipe your card? Well then, you could be on a list of people who have problems with gas, or diarrhea, or dandruff or any of a hundred other ailments - all to be compiled and sent out to drug companies that might want to target you for advertising. Chapters has a loyalty card. That means they can track everything you read. Who has access to that list? In The US they have banned video stores from keeping track of what videos people rent, but there's no such law in Canada.

I find it odd you have this deep concern for privacy rights yet you believe that if somewhere in the fine print it says something ambiguous about lists everything is then okay.

The reason they banned the video store lists is because they were being used to decide court appointments. When Robert Bork was nominated to the Supreme Court, they looked up his video rentals to see if they could nail him. It is wrong and it seriously put the fear in people of reading the wrong books or watching the wrong videos.

I have not said that everything about loyalty cards is right. But people kept comparing the cards to the profile the Tories kept. It wasn't the same based on consent which was not given.

The latest privacy invasion is RFID. If you put milk in card, the RFID can be programmed to track your every movement including after you take it out of the store. There are no rules in place on these and consent is not automatically given just because you buy a food staple.

[jdobbin]

I think the political agenda of Kofman is to resuscitate the Scary Harper mongering. She sound like a non-Conservative diehard whose loyalty clearly belongs to another party. And I wouldn't be surprised to know that she is on the payroll of that party.

There have been several other recipients who were concerned about their names and information being collected. Why single her out?

How much of your own information are you willing to have shared? If someone from this forum was able to find out where you lived, worked and what church you went to, would you feel comfortable? If they were able to build up that profile with few limits, is that something you would feel comfortable with? As someone pointed out, it is possible for information to shared on what videos you have rented. If all information can be freely shared, do you really want someone to know what your movie tastes and using it for political purposes?

[ScottSA]

There have been several other recipients who were concerned about their names and information being collected. Why single her out?

How much of your own information are you willing to have shared? If someone from this forum was able to find out where you lived, worked and what church you went to, would you feel comfortable? If they were able to build up that profile with few limits, is that something you would feel comfortable with? As someone pointed out, it is possible for information to shared on what videos you have rented. If all information can be freely shared, do you really want someone to know what your movie tastes and using it for political purposes?

Seems to me there are two issues here:

1 What the privacy act says, and

2 Our personal opinions of what is right.

Those distinctions should probably be made, since much of this thread seems to equate one's personal feelings with the law, by virtue of "ought."

[jdobbin]

Seems to me there are two issues here:

1 What the privacy act says, and

2 Our personal opinions of what is right.

Those distinctions should probably be made, since much of this thread seems to equate one's personal feelings with the law, by virtue of "ought."

There are two components of the Privacy Act. The first addresses the information that the government collects to do its job and who it shares it with. For example, the Privacy Act prevents Revenue Canada from accessing data freely on RCMP records and using it to determine who to audit. Likewise, the police can't access Revenue Canada records without a warrant. No fishing expeditions to see about wrongdoing.

The second component of the Privacy Act is what information is collected by private companies and organizations. They have rules in places about sharing and securing data on things like your medical records and financial files. For example, if doctors freely shared information with insurance companies, a profile could be determined about you while you were still in the womb.

The Privacy Act was recently improved but still needs work. On the issue of political lists, the Privacy Commissioner is still investigating about people who applied for a passport and suddenly were getting birthday cards from their MP. Some say harmless, other say slippery slope. Government information used for political purposes is against the law.

The inquiry into the political lists of the Conservatives will look into two things: Was government information used to collect data and how the lists were compiled in general and whether someone released that information without consent. Both can result in charges.

Political lists in general are not covered under the Act but where the data comes from is.

Edited October 13, 2007 by jdobbin

[sharkman]

We've had comments from those of Jewish decent, here's some support for the Tories from Jewish lobby groups.

Has anyone heard yet of legal or criminal action being brought against the Tories for sending out greeting cards to ethnic groups? I haven't heard of a one, and if you discount the dozens of attempts to start inquiries and investigations by one jdobbin, I don't think there are any (I can imagine dobbin down at the local RCMP pleading his case to a bored member who wonders how in hell he manages to get all the citizens arrest types on his shift).

In honor of 18 pages of a thread that is in part entitled, lists of Jews, and authored by a guy who likes to call himself The Doctor, I think it is appropriate to henceforth call him by the title he has chosen, Herr Doktor.

[ScottSA]

We've had comments from those of Jewish decent, here's some support for the Tories from Jewish lobby groups.

Has anyone heard yet of legal or criminal action being brought against the Tories for sending out greeting cards to ethnic groups?

Admit it...there's no moral difference between sending out greeting cards and committing genocide.

[Fortunata]

Admit it...there's no moral difference between sending out greeting cards and committing genocide.

So if this government commits anything less than genocide it's ok because it could be worse?

[jdobbin]

We've had comments from those of Jewish decent, here's some support for the Tories from Jewish lobby groups.

Has anyone heard yet of legal or criminal action being brought against the Tories for sending out greeting cards to ethnic groups? I haven't heard of a one, and if you discount the dozens of attempts to start inquiries and investigations by one jdobbin, I don't think there are any (I can imagine dobbin down at the local RCMP pleading his case to a bored member who wonders how in hell he manages to get all the citizens arrest types on his shift).

The Privacy Commissioner is tasked with the job of inquiries not the RCMP. The article you linked mentioned has begun the process of looking into the how the list was compiled.

[ScottSA]

So if this government commits anything less than genocide it's ok because it could be worse?

Yes, I realize that sending out greeting cards is a precursor to genocide, and I don't mean to minimize the very real danger of paper cuts, and possible disease transmission, but give me a break.

[jdobbin]

Admit it...there's no moral difference between sending out greeting cards and committing genocide.

I have never had issue with sending out greeting cards. I do have issues with compiling lists without consent for the purposes of solicitation. How do you feel about someone in this forum tracking you down to where you live and work? Even if they only send a birthday card, do you not feel your privacy is violated?

[ScottSA]

I have never had issue with sending out greeting cards. I do have issues with compiling lists without consent for the purposes of solicitation. How do you feel about someone in this forum tracking you down to where you live and work? Even if they only send a birthday card, do you not feel your privacy is violated?

I guess I'll worry about it when it happens, but i'm not sure what, if anything, that has to do with the government sending out greeting cards.

[jdobbin]

I guess I'll worry about it when it happens, but i'm not sure what, if anything, that has to do with the government sending out greeting cards.

It has to do with information gathered about you without your consent. How was the information compiled? How is it stored? Can you get your name removed from a list? Can the list be corrected for mistakes? Can that list be accessed by others or shared? For example, can employers get access to your religious information? Presently, they can't ask for it in a job application but can they get it from groups such as the Tories who data mine?

[sharkman]

Another good poiont raised by Herr Doktor, but in reality the business world does far more devious things than compile lists to send out greeting cards, although they do that too. Ever used a Safeway club card or similar product at umpteen grocery/big box stores? Because they study and track your purchasing habits, looking for a way to manipulate you to buy more. Dozens of corporations compile databases containing very personal information which is bought and sold, again in the name of business and used for profit, all done legally, although illegal transactions are exposed now and then.

But no, Herr Doktor is right, compiling a list to send out greeting cards to a target market of voters is just crazy.

[jdobbin]

Ever used a Safeway club card or similar product at umpteen grocery/big box stores? Because they study and track your purchasing habits, looking for a way to manipulate you to buy more. Dozens of corporations compile databases containing very personal information which is bought and sold, again in the name of business and used for profit, all done legally, although illegal transactions are exposed now and then.

By getting a loyalty card, you give consent. Where was the consent in the lists the Tories compiled?

Even with consent, companies have to abide by certain rules on information and how it is shared.

[jbg]

Never mind the soft approach of sending religious holiday-greeting cards!

What I truly find scary is the NDP/Liberal government's tactics of buying votes.....outright pandering to religious groups!

Why, are you attacking the concept of government funded Ukranian Transexual and Gay-Lesbian Pride Parades?

[Higgly]

I haven't read all the posts in this thread , but I personally am against anybody keeping any sort of personal information about me, including my religious affiliation, without me knowing it so I can have a chance to ask the privacy commissioner to give me a ruling on the matter.

And now back to our regularly scheduled program...

Edited October 13, 2007 by Higgly

[jdobbin]

More on the Tory profile database collected without consent.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...18?hub=Politics

"If somebody contacts their MP because they're having a problem with their CPP benefit or their military pension, they don't expect to end up on a mailing list for a political party,'' said David Fraser, a Halifax lawyer who specializes in privacy issues with the firm McInnes Cooper.

"If they are going to end up on a mailing list, I think there's an ethical obligation to inform them and give them the opportunity to opt out.''

Michael Geist, a law professor who serves as the Canada research chair of Internet and e-commerce law at the University of Ottawa, agrees.

"When you're going to your local MP with a concern or a problem, there is a certain level of confidentiality,'' said Geist.

"The notion that it's simply a data point that gets used to characterize the particular constituent could have a bit of a chilling effect.''

Nonetheless, the Conservatives are likely within the letter of Canada's privacy laws, because they are neither a government agency nor considered a commercial operation.

Geist argues that political parties' fundraising efforts might make them liable under the commercial privacy law, known as PIPEDA, but Fraser says the legislation as written suggests otherwise.

"Generally, political parties aren't regulated with respect to how they collect, use and disclose personal information,'' said Fraser.

The Conservatives, who openly boasted about their state-of-the-art CIMS database after purchasing it in 2004, now refuse to discuss it.

"I will not talk about internal party databases,'' said party spokesman Ryan Sparrow. "I'm not disclosing what is in our database, who is in our database.''

When asked if Canadians can request to see their file on the CIMS database, Sparrow responded: "What would be their specific need to see?''

Asked a second time, Sparrow shut down the inquiry.

"I'm not going to help you with your story. It's internal party matters.''

The Liberal party says it voluntarily follows the principles of PIPEDA -- including showing any individual who asks what is on their file -- even though the act does not apply to political parties.

"We do not keep any information on individuals without their expressed consent,'' said Elizabeth Whiting, the party's communications director.

The NDP also said citizens are free to ask to see their file, although the party is not aware it has ever received such a request.

Fraser said political parties, regardless of the law, should follow the best-practice standards established by the Canadian Standards Association, upon which both federal privacy acts are based.

"Those best practices, which are almost universally recognized in most western democracies, would suggest that political parties should give notice, get consent and provide people access to their information,'' said Fraser.

"Whether or not they choose to do that would speak volumes to how they see themselves as responsible custodians of this personal information.''

We still haven't seen what the Privacy Commissioner's report but according to some privacy experts, the Tories should practice the best standards of privacy and are not doing so.