Fauss recommends revising two bills and opposing two others
Fauss asks the Council to revise T2026-2555 and T2026-1440 to incorporate expert perspectives and not to move forward with T2026-2554 and T2026-2553 due to CFB concerns, and argues the DORIS policy's transitory framing is backwards since instant messages are often records.
We asked the council to revise T-2026-2555, that's the blackout period bill,
and T-2026-1440, the third-party communication reporting, to incorporate the perspectives of the experts here today.
And then we asked the council not to move forward with...
2445 and 2, I'm sorry, 2554 and 2553 because of some of the concerns of the CFB.
raised. On the records retention issue, I think the bill we've put together would answer a lot of the questions that you had, Gail, in particular.
transitory.
The Doris policy talks about transitory as it's almost presupposing that an instant message would never be a record and we think that's a bit backwards.
I would suggest we define instant messages as substantive and non-substantive and take transitory out of it because in reality we know that those messages are records.
They contain
information that should be retained.
I want to just have a clarification.
Doris does have a role in deletion policy under the charter.
They are supposed to approve whether messages are deleted or not.
I'm sorry, records are deleted or not.
So our draft bill would also make sure that instant messages are part of that.
So I know my time is out, but I think the draft legislation we put in this testimony and that I know we shared with you in advance, I think would address many of the problems that were raised today.
And we look forward to talking with you more about that.