Public Safety Committee on May 7th, 2009

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Other than that individual's statement, there's nothing else you have.

[Paul Cavalluzzo]

That's correct.

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Let's assume, because we see no evidence that they've been implemented, that they've not been. Are you aware of any new cases or rights abuses that have taken place since these reports?

What I'm trying to get at is that these recommendations have not been implemented. Obviously they were made to prevent further abuses. As a result of the failure to implement, are you aware of any other cases that have arisen?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

I would simply say that we do have ongoing complaints against many organizations with national security mandates, but I do not know...and the nature of our regime is that I can't speak of the contents publicly. Certainly we have complaints on an ongoing basis against many of the organizations we've discussed today.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Thank you very much.

We'll go to Mr. MacKenzie, please.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Perhaps you can see why the British system might not work as well here as it does in Britain.

Is that not the nature of your work, to investigate ongoing complaints?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Yes, absolutely.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

If we go back to the Air India inquiry that's ongoing, one of the issues raised in that was the lack of information sharing between the federal agencies, and so on. Are there things we can learn and should learn and perhaps have learned from that particular inquiry in a public sense of why we need to improve information sharing among our agencies as opposed to limiting it?

I understand the need for privacy, but I think there is a need for sharing.

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Yes. I don't disagree with that.

I can't prejudge what Mr. Justice Major may be saying in his report; however, I did find very instructive the recent report of the Auditor General, which I think is very illuminating on this question and which highlighted the need for intelligence sharing. Highlighted also was the fact that some recommendations she made in an audit in 2003, I believe, had not been followed up on.

Highlighted also was the misuse of the Privacy Act, which is a great concern of mine, in that the Privacy Act is quoted as a reason for not sharing intelligence among national security agencies. When the Auditor General asked where the legal opinion was or where the memorandum was and how they analyzed the Privacy Act such that they thought it prevented them from sharing information, there were none of these documents.

I think that's an important part of the puzzle that we have to look at. It's not only that the Privacy Act be respected, but possibly that the Privacy Act be refocused to be more contemporary, and also that it not be used wrongly as a shield against necessary information sharing.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

One of the witnesses before the Major inquiry who was from the Canadian banks, which are mandated to provide information through FINTRAC, indicated, I think, that there was an issue about their feeling that they were in the dark. They must provide the information, but there's no sort of feedback, if you will, or whatever.

There's a sense that there's a big package there that is worthwhile, and that it is worth their time and effort to do it, but that sometimes we get caught up--and rightly so--in being concerned about privacy. Sometimes we make it so secret that the folks whose cooperation we need in a general sense feel that perhaps we've gone too far one way.

I don't know whether you have any comments.

[Jennifer Stoddart]

I think my colleague has some thoughts on that.

[Chantal Bernier]

Indeed, as the commissioner has said, we would refer you to the March 2009 Report of the Auditor General, wherein she specifically raises that issue and says that the Canadian population will trust the national security and intelligence organizations only if it knows that they have maintained the proper balance between privacy and national security. She goes on to say that this proper balance has not been struck due to a lack of guidance to the departments and agencies concerned.

I can tell you what we are doing at the moment in this regard. You've mentioned FINTRAC. We are about to complete an audit of FINTRAC. We are mandated by law to do so, and it is about to come out, so you will certainly want to turn your attention to that.

In 2006, we did an audit of CBSA. We are following up on it now and we are addressing, in that context, information sharing agreements. We are also working with Treasury Board, as my colleague Carman Baggaley and the commissioner have said, on developing guidance on information sharing. This guidance will contain provisions on transborder sharing of information.

Finally, we are also reviewing the very recent Transport Canada-RCMP agreement on information sharing from the point of view of privacy.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

I think that at one point you were perhaps going to answer my colleague across the aisle when there was an issue about whether anything had been done, and I think Ms. Stoddart indicated that in your previous home you perhaps had more knowledge about how some of those things may have been done.

I know that we simply don't have the time, but I'm quite satisfied that it isn't the case that nothing's been done; there has been a great deal done. Maybe it's not complete, but there has been a great deal done, and I know it's through the work of people like you, so thank you.

[Chantal Bernier]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

I'd like to thank the witnesses. We'll end this portion of our meeting. We're going to suspend for a minute or two.

Again, thank you very much. We're going to have to clear the room because we're going in camera.

[Proceedings continue in camera]