Make the case for bank data
Statistics Canada shouldn’t expect private banking data before it makes the case for it
Canadians are just now learning that Statistics Canada has plans to call up the nation’s banks and collect the detailed financial transaction data of 500,000 randomly selected people.
At a time when concerns about how personal data is collected and used by public agencies and private corporations grow by the day, it comes as no surprise that many weren’t pleased about this. Nor could they have been happier to have heard about it — just two months before it was to begin — through a Global News report and the subsequent uproar in the House of Commons.
Canada’s privacy commissioner, who had been making recommendations to the government agency about how to ensure privacy protections, has now launched a full investigation. As well he should.
StatsCan has spent the past few years coming out from under the shadow of the Harper government, which was only to happy to play wedge politics with the agency and went so far as to kill the long-form census. Now, under Justin Trudeau’s government, which rightly supports freeing scientists and promoting accurate data collection to inform public policy decisions, Statistics Canada is clearly flexing its muscles.
The data it collects from a host of sources provides vital information that helps determine everything from where health-care funding is directed and new schools are built to understanding how anti-poverty measures and employment programs are working.
And, to be sure, collecting accurate data is getting harder as fewer people are willing to participate in surveys or even have a home phone, let alone answer it.
Canada’s chief statistician, Anil Arora, argues the agency is simply adapting to the times — lives (and finances) now happen online — and seeking new sources to get the best data to measure the economy and changes in society.
Perhaps this is the best way to gather accurate data, but StatsCan and the government should have to make that case. They should not have let this plan proceed as though it were a proposal for a telephone survey on commuting patterns.
If they want the data, they need to show why it’s needed, what will be collected, how it will be used and what safeguards will be in place to ensure it doesn’t fall into the wrong hands.
And if that case is made, more can certainly be done to protect privacy than currently envisioned.
Statistics Canada planned to collect the data from the banks and remove all personal identifiers before using the anonymized data for statistical purposes. The better way — as was already recommended by Privacy Commissioner Daniel Therrien — is to remove personal identifiers before the data is disclosed to the agency. That greatly reduces the chance that any data breach down the line will expose highly sensitive personal information.
That StatsCan apparently has the right to get this data from banks — without consent or even requiring that people be told about it — also raises significant concerns about the state of privacy laws.
From a purely data point of view, it’s possible to see how that’s desirable. The long-form census, rightly reintroduced by the Trudeau government, is random and mandatory. By asking for consent for banking information it’s no longer random — since some people will say no — and the data skewed.
But informed consent is the direction that updated privacy legislation is taking around the world. Statistics Canada itself makes a point of saying that when it shares any information it has with other organizations for statistical purposes it does so “only with your consent.”
If the agency feels it needs to skip that step when it comes to something as personal as banking information it should be willing to stand up and convince the public of the need for it.