House Committee Releases Report on CASL
Jan 2018 Charity & NFP Law Update
On December 13, 2017, the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology (the “Committee”) presented its report “Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation: Clarifications are in Order” (the “Report”). The Committee conducted a statutory review of Canada’s anti-spam legislation (“CASL”) between September 26, 2017 and December 12, 2017, the results of which are set out in the Report.
Of note to charities and not-for-profits, recommendation 8 in the Report states that:
The Committee recommends that the Government of Canada clarify the application of the Act and its regulations to charities and non-profit organizations to ensure that the legislation is clear and understandable to these organizations and do no create unintended costs of compliance.
The Committee heard various witnesses from the not-for-profit sector, including Imagine Canada, which was summarized in the November/December 2017 Charity & NFP Law Update. The recommendation in the Report does not go as far as some witnesses proposed to the Committee in exempting registered charities from the requirements of CASL, or creating broader exceptions for other not-for-profits. However, it is hoped that the government will review CASL and its general application to the not-for-profit sector.
The Report also includes recommendations with general application which would also be of interest to charities and not-for-profits that might be involved in sending commercial electronic message (“CEMs”). These include a recommendation that the government clarify the definition of CEM, “electronic address” as well as the provisions pertaining to “implied consent” and “express consent” under CASL. The Report demonstrates that several years after CASL coming into force, its application is far from clear. The Committee’s conclusion recognizes this fact by stating, “While improving guidance and education should be a priority moving forward, it can only achieve so much. The Act [CASL] and its regulations require clarifications to reduce the cost of compliance and better focus enforcement.”