FC: Why Canadian privacy commissioner should have been booted

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Wed Jul 02 2003 - 17:17:35 PDT

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: Comcast plugs up The Well, bounces legitimate email"

    Politech archive:
    http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=Radwanski
    
    ---
    
    From: "Jim Harper - Privacilla.org" <jim.harperat_private>
    To: <declanat_private>
    Subject: RE: Canada's privacy commissioner's farewell statement vanishes
    Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 13:59:11 -0400
    
    Does anyone need reminding that all this nonsense is what you get when you
    rely on bureaucrats and politicians for privacy?
    
    Jim Harper
    Editor
    Privacilla.org
    
    ---
    
    From: Charles Putnam <charles.putnamat_private>
    To: "'declanat_private'" <declanat_private>
    Subject: Canada's privacy commissioner's farewell statement vanishes
    Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 15:30:45 -0400
    
    Please remind me again why I'm supposed to get all uptight merely because
    the former privacy commissioner's replacement removed his predecessor's
    self-serving tirade from the commission's official website? How long was the
    commission legally or morally obligated to keep the statement there?  Why
    should I be outraged, especially when the letter still is available
    elsewhere on the net to sufficiently intrepid searchers and [presumably]
    also could be obtained in hard copy under Canada's open records laws?  Is
    there some law or rule of behavior that requires operators of government
    websites to keep posted material up indefinitely, even if they deem it
    self-serving, or worse, misleading?
    
    It would have been more helpful to provide Radwanski's harangue along with a
    reference to the parliamentary report:
    
    http://clk.about.com/?zi=1/XJ&sdn=canadaonline&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.parl.gc.ca%2FInfoComDoc%2F37%2F2%2FOGGO%2FStudies%2FReports%2Foggorp05-e.htm
    
    to allow your readers to actually follow what the name calling was all
    about.
    
    IMHO, after reviewing the parliamentary committee's report and Radwanski's
    letter,  it boils down to this: a standing committee of legislators found
    that Radwanski bullied his staff, believed the subordinates' testimony that
    Radwanski falsified information filed with the committee, and found that he
    tried to circumvent the open records law; Radwanski then resigned before
    facing removal proceedings [which, by the way, would presumably have been
    the open, adversarial forum he claimed to want so badly . . .].
    
    In my experience as a former civil servant, it is not a good employment
    strategy to bully subordinates, lie on expense reimbursement forms and then
    lie to legislators, regardless of the righteousness of one's views and
    policies on other matters.  I am not yet persuaded that the Privacy
    Commission's webmaster was in any way obligated to keep Radwanski's letter
    posted for a day, much less in perpetuity.
    
    Best regards,
    Charles Putnam
    
    ---
    
    Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 15:52:56 -0600
    From: Chris Jones <cdjonesat_private>
    To: declanat_private
    Subject: Re: FC: Canada's privacy commissioner's farewell statement vanishes
    References: <5.2.1.1.0.20030702110943.0478cda0at_private>
    In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.0.20030702110943.0478cda0at_private>
    
    I have no knowledge of the truth or falsehood of former Commissioner
    >Radwanski's statement.  I just find it interesting that the most
    >politically active national privacy commissioner in the world has been
    >forced out of office -- and that his resignation statement has been
    >removed mere days after its publication.
    
    ... with all due respect to John Gilmore, he may be seeing patterns that 
    don't exist.
    
    The investigation into Commissioner Radwanski was unanimously supported by 
    the all-party committee that oversees Parliamentary officers.  Given that 
    several of the parties on the committee are opposed to the same 
    privacy-invasive initiatives that Radwanski had been, it would seem 
    incredible that they would be complicit in forcing him out for opposing 
    those initiatives.
    
    Given that one of the key requirements for Parliamentary officers is that 
    they be absolutely trustworthy, behaviour such as that found by the 
    committee is, and should be, a firing offence.  Concealing information from 
    and misleading Parliament cannot be condoned; Commissioner Radwanski had 
    the opportunity to be forthright and provide the truth.
    Had he done so, he would likely still be the Privacy Commissioner (though 
    perhaps with a tighter financial leash).
    
    ---
    
    (Declan: Please anonymize this if you post it to Politech. Thanks.)
    
     >The statement enclosed in this message has disappeared from the web
     >site of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, where I obtained it
     >several days ago.  It was apparently censored by the outgoing
     >Commissioner's replacement.
    
    "Censored" is a little extreme, but that's just my personal opinion...
    
     >I have no knowledge of the truth or falsehood of former Commissioner
     >Radwanski's statement.  I just find it interesting that the most
     >politically active national privacy commissioner in the world has been
     >forced out of office -- and that his resignation statement has been
     >removed mere days after its publication.
    
    I'm not surprised by that - I was more surprised by the fact that the
    entire statement as it is written appeared on the website at all. The
    website is for the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, which is different
    from the Privacy Commissioner as a person. Given the nature of that
    statement, it's about Radwanski answering/deflecting (unsuccessfully on
    both counts) the charges against him, not about the office itself. It's
    not the responsibility of the office to act as the mouthpiece for
    Radwanski, nor is it right for him to use the office for that purpose.
    
    (It actually strikes me as more of the same thing that got him in trouble
    in the first place - using the office toward his own - pretty damn selfish
    - ends.)
    
    Anyway, I don't buy that Radwanski's activism is what got him forced out
    of office, in spite of what he says. The committee that investigated this
    matter is an all-party committee, and the decision was unanimous. If
    Radwanksi was so good at sticking it to the ruling Liberals, it's hard to
    imagine why MPs from other parties would jump on board. Radwanksi's claim
    that they did it because they wanted to trash somebody the Liberals
    appointed is just an attempt to play both sides at once, and seems pretty
    inconsistent. In any event, the effectiveness of Radwanski's activism is
    open to question.
    
    Here's the committee's final report:
    
    http://www.parl.gc.ca/InfoComDoc/37/2/OGGO/Studies/Reports/oggorp05-e.htm
    
    Here's a list of Radwanski's meal and travel expenses:
    
    http://www.thehilltimes.ca/2003/june/23/radwanski_list/
    
    ---
    
    From: "Paul6412 Rogers" <paul6412at_private>
    To: <declanat_private>
    References: <5.2.1.1.0.20030702110943.0478cda0at_private>
    Subject: Re: Canada's privacy commissioner's farewell statement vanishes
    Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 13:58:20 -0400
    MIME-Version: 1.0
    
    Needles to say, they did not take Mr. Radwanski recommendation to appoint
    Mr. Leary as interim commissioner either.
    
    http://www.pco.gc.ca/lgc/default.asp?Language=E&Page=NewsRoom&Sub=press&Doc=20030627_marleau_e.htm
    
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
    Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Jul 02 2003 - 21:49:06 PDT