Thanks for your comment; I didn’t mean to suggest that the OPC would use contributions to tame advocates – I’ve not received that impression – but was more reflecting on comments from advocates that have spoken to me about their perceived relationships with the program. There is a feeling that some things ‘just can’t be pitched”. It’s in light of this that I’m really pleased to see you post to clarify/address those perceived worries and provide notes on funding allocation. The willingness of your office to regularly engage with issues such as these in public spaces (including ones that are relatively unknown, such as this blog *grin*) speaks well of our federal regulators willingness to engage in outreach, and is very appreciated.

Speaking as the manager responsible for the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada’s Contributions Program, I can tell you that possible or real conflicts between the OPC, advocates or researchers over policy or investigations do not affect who receives funding under the Program.

Our funding decisions are guided by the terms and conditions originally approved by the Treasury Board, which are meant to increase awareness of privacy issues among the research community, not-for-profits and the public.

We do evaluate proposals for funding to see if they fit under our broad policy priorities, or present an innovative approach to public education.

These proposals could very well argue a position contrary to our own, and could end up presenting recommendations that contradict our own position.

I will say that we take into account whether a proposal identifies qualified and experienced resources to complete the project in an acceptable manner.

But, from our end, the process does not include a mechanism to reflect potential policy conflicts between the OPC and the researcher.

Indeed, the OPC has in the past funded organizations that have taken critical views of our work. Their criticism of the OPC has not kept us from judging their funding proposals on the basis of merit.

The Program exists to encourage research in areas related to privacy and the private sector: that’s what we try to do every year.