Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Oct. 3rd, 2012

[Dr. Mark Tyndall]

Thanks for the question.

Obviously, I don't. As this issue goes further and further, we've been careful not to push it to exclude any possibility that we can at least get the value back in what we had. There is a whole movement that everybody should be treated exactly the same, that health is a basic human right and that this should be offered to everybody.

At this point in time, I think the IFH, as it was, doesn't go to that extent. I think strategically, even if that's ultimately what I would support, feeling very strongly that health is a human right, at this point the cutbacks have taken us so far away from that that we're trying to battle to at least get some basic coverage back.

I think it reflects very badly on Canada if we deny health care to people. I'm amazed at stories I read in the paper about animals being helped out. We would not deny health coverage to any Canadian, so—

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

Hold on one second. I'm sorry.

Mr. Dykstra.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

I don't have any problem with anyone disagreeing at a certain point. That's the way democracy works. But if Sadia's questions are going to relate to health care, I feel that you, as the chair, could make the determination, while the question is being asked, that if it's relevant to security, no problem, but if it's relevant to what the health committee should be studying, then I would submit that that's the time to interject and say make sure it relates to the committee work that we're studying and not something that may very well be a health care issue that could be debated at the health committee. But certainly not from a security perspective did this have anything to do with the safety and security of our borders.

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

Okay.

Let's go over to Député Lamoureux.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

It's to the same point.

Madam Chair, if the member was actually doing this through a point of order, I think what we have to do—because I do believe the presenter was very relevant to the actual question—

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

I'm not asking your opinion; I'm asking the chair's.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

And I'm advising the chair—

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

You and I have had this discussion already. I know what your opinion is.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

All right. My advice—

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

You brought a motion forward that was defeated, actually.

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

The chair is going to call for order from all sides, and if people could go through the chair....

I was asked by Député Dykstra to make a determination, and I am going to do that. In the meantime, Député Lamoureux had a point of order, or whatever, so he has a right to make his...and then I believe Sadia has a comment. I will make a ruling after that.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Chair, it's a very simple issue. I do believe the presenter was relevant to the question, and if there is going to be an interruption, it should be after the question itself is asked.

If the member had a difficult time with the question being out of order, that's one thing, but he was relevant to the question itself.

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

Thank you, Député Lamoureux.

Député Sadia, on a point of order.

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Yes, Madam Chair.

I just wanted to point out that it's important for witnesses to be able to finish answering a question. I don't think that interrupting them all the time is the role of the members in this committee.

I wanted to point that out, Madam Chair. I think it's important to remind all the committee members of that.

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

Thank you very much.

Député Groguhé has the time to ask her questions, and I'll go over to Dr. Tyndall to continue answering them.

Everybody is aware that the questions all relate to security.

Thank you.

[Dr. Mark Tyndall]

I think I was pretty much finished.

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

Thank you.

Back to you, Sadia. Do you have another—

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Yes, I have another question.

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

You have lots of time.

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

My second question is for Mr. Muller.

You talked about the overall limitations of biometrics and technology in security. In one of your articles, you talk about the fetishization of biometrics and conclude with three recommendations: carry out an in-depth review of the risk management approach; do not treat technological measures as a cure-all; and consult the affected communities and stakeholders more about border management.

Are you recommending that to the committee again? Could you elaborate a little on that?

[Dr. Benjamin Muller]

Thank you.

Yes, I would stand behind those recommendations.

The application of risk management and the way that has occurred is very much connected to the deployment of these technologies, so I think examining that relationship is very important.

As these sorts of experiences tend to endlessly confirm for me, there is a quick reaction to looking at numbers that suggest that somehow biometrics are good, full stop. There are very rarely specifics ever given, in terms of a precise issue it will deal with at the border that is currently not dealt with sufficiently. I think that's a significant issue.

The other issue is that the public in general, and particularly those who inhabit border communities, often tend not to be terribly favourable in terms of wanting the use of these technologies.

In the NEXUS case, there's a reasonable enrollment because of lifestyle. But studies have shown—and there have been quite significant studies done on the Washington-B.C. border about this—that many people have chosen not to enrol in the NEXUS program, to stay in the lineups, simply for the fact that they have questions about the use of this technology and the way it can create this sort of “data double” issue, where a variety of pieces of data are linked together to create a persona that may or may not be a reasonable approximation of you.

Are we happy to make judgments on that basis, not to mention that increasingly data is demonstrating that these are not infallible technologies, by any stretch of the imagination?

When the designers of AVATAR themselves say their technology does not meet their own threshold, I think that's rather significant. But in that case, it's not significant to those willing to buy in to it.

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

You have a minute and a half.

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

We had a witness—

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

Pardon me, my apologies. It was five minutes and your time is up.

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Already?