Canadian Government Executive - Volume 22 - Issue 5

9 / 32

May 2016 // Canadian Government Executive / 9
Strategy
The rise of the so-called fin-tech sector (intermixing financial
processing with technological innovation) is not only disrupting
the financial industry but also the complex and relatively stable
system of ownership, oversight, and regulation that underpins it.
cessing with technological innovation) is
not only disrupting the financial industry
but also the complex and relatively stable
system of ownership, oversight, and regu-
lation that underpins it.
Even setting security threats aside, there
are good reasons to be concerned about
the status quo. While countries such as
Denmark are allowing retailers to phase
out actual hard currencies if they wish to
do so (its own government already having
gone entirely paperless in dealing with
businesses and individuals), the Canadian
economy continues to rely upon nearly
one billion paper cheques annually.
The resulting problems are well docu-
mented. A 2012 Task Force on the Pay-
ments Systems in Canada initiated by the
Minister of Finance examined many of the
growing pressures–albeit at a time when
mobile commerce remained at its infancy.
A more recent report by the CD Howe
Institute (Money in Motion: Modernizing
Canada’s Payment System) builds a per-
suasive case for abandoning paper, citing
productivity gains and security enhance-
ments in doing so.
Yet as the UK found several years ago,
merely announcing an intention to go
paperless can be counter-productive, gal-
vanizing resistance and concern. The loss
of privacy was an issue for some groups,
one amplified in recent months as the Gov-
ernment has introduced an expansion of
national security laws, greatly expanding
the surveillance capacities of state authori-
ties. Whatever your views on appropriate
government action, the new laws reflect a
robust and highly visible political debate.
As boundaries between national security
and financial payment systems shift and
become more fluid and inter-related, our
personal notions of privacy must evolve
accordingly–as must our collective capaci-
ties for making policy determinations as to
what sort of protection and trade-offs are
both feasible and appropriate.
Such progress requires a widened po-
litical dialogue beyond the confines of
traditional actors such as Parliamentary
Committees and Privacy Commissioners
(much as the latter is warranted in his
present pursuit of bolstered powers for
public reporting and oversight). Although
it may well never see the light of the day,
the American proposal for a national com-
mission is sensible in this regard.
Yet Canada should not await further
American developments. In the months
following 9-11, this country’s national secu-
rity apparatus was swiftly refashioned in
a manner that largely reflected US actions
and pressures. For our own digital prow-
ess and collective security, a domestically
forged strategy to both preserve and in
some instances redefine privacy is an ur-
gent priority.
Jeffrey Roy is professor in the School
of Public Administration at Dalhousie
University .