Election 2026 · Public record
What B.C.’s privacy commissioner already said about political petitions
DCC Now · September 26, 2026 · By Sarbjot Singh Locham
Council slates are collecting names on petitions aimed at Victoria. Residents need the rule that already exists in British Columbia, not a new accusation.
Investigation Report P19-01 — Full Disclosure: Political parties, campaign data, and voter consent — was issued February 6, 2019 by then Information and Privacy Commissioner Michael McEvoy. It applies PIPA to political organizations in B.C. The findings on petitions are short and specific.
What P19-01 says about petitions
Section 4.5: when someone signs a petition they typically give name, address, phone, email, and support for that issue.
Finding 8: Parties have implied consent to use that information only to further the objective of the petition.
Finding 9: Parties were using petition lists to contact signers. Only one party had express consent even for that contact. None had consent for any additional use.
Recommendation 4: Get express consent if the names will be used for any purpose other than promoting the issue on the petition.
Recommendation 5: Put a short, plain purpose statement on the petition itself — not buried in a linked privacy policy.
The Commissioner also wrote that a privacy-policy link at the bottom of an e-petition is “questionable” as adequate notice.
What that means in Delta
A petition hosted on a slate site, signed “on behalf of residents,” and used in a municipal campaign is not automatically illegal. It is also not automatically consented campaign data.
Under P19-01, the obvious purpose is delivering the stated ask (Beedie Long-Term Care Centre / a North Delta urgent or primary care centre) to the government named on the form.
These uses need a clear yes on the form, or they sit outside Finding 8:
- Municipal campaign email, texts, or calls
- Fundraising or volunteer asks
- Merging the list into a slate voter database
- Uploading emails to Facebook or similar for ads or “lookalike” targeting (Finding 16: not permitted without express consent; a petition email is given as the example of what is not enough)
Timing a provincial health ask during a civic election can be advocacy. Reusing the signers as a campaign list without saying so is a different question. P19-01 treats that as a consent problem, not a slogan problem.
What is still not on the public record
DCC Now asked, in the September 25 open letter, whether petition names and contacts will be used for campaign purposes, whether the petition will be delivered to Victoria, and when.
That answer is still due Friday, October 2, 2026, 5:00 p.m. Pacific, to info@dccnow.com. Replies published in full. No reply = no reply.
This piece does not find a PIPA breach. It publishes the existing rule. The slate can close the gap in writing: purpose on the form, who holds the list, campaign reuse yes or no, delivery date.
DCC Now does not endorse candidates or slates. Source: OIPC Investigation Report P19-01 (2019 BCIPC 07), ss. 4.5, Findings 8–9, Recommendations 4–5, Finding 16.
Sarbjot Singh Locham
Resident & Editor
DCC Now – Delta Community Concerns
info@dccnow.com · dccnow.com