Justice committee  I tend to disagree with the interpretation of the statute that says lawful authority is anybody with a badge. Let me tell you what is routinely disclosed without a warrant in these sorts of cases. Many of these are reported in court cases. You just have to go the legal databases and search for PIPEDA requests.

Justice committee  My first question when I saw it and heard the debate about it is that if this is already the law, why are we putting it in the law? It really does beg the question. It must be doing something. When you pull it apart and look at all of its different pieces, it says that you will have no liability for doing something that you're not prohibited from doing; it doesn't say you'll have no liability for something that you're lawfully able to do.

Justice committee  That would be a misreading of PIPEDA. If law enforcement or anybody asked for information, and it's provided under paragraph 7(3)(c.1) of PIPEDA, and the customer then says “Did you hand over my information?”, the telco, the service provider, has to go to the law enforcement agency and ask them for permission to hand over the information.

Justice committee  I don't have them in front of me, but I do believe that the general production order power, a general warrant power, and specific wiretap orders generally will cover off most information that's necessary in these circumstances. Then we have these additional ones with respect to the installation of tracking devices and things like that.

Justice committee  In my view, the police should be able to obtain just about any information other than privileged information, as long as it's coupled with the appropriate judicial authorization. Absolutely.

Justice committee  There are a whole bunch of moving parts, but without looking at it, I would agree.

Justice committee  I believe so. Yes, I do.

Justice committee  So if it's somebody walking down the street and—

Justice committee  I would pick up the phone and call 911.

Justice committee  No.

Justice committee  Specifically you're asking about that in the absence of the availability to order preservation. I'm in agreement with the preservation powers in the bill. Currently, it's my understanding, most telcos do voluntarily cooperate. I know I've been involved in civil matters where we have required or have requested the preservation of information in order to then get a subsequent court order to identify an individual, including in the case we took to the Supreme Court of Canada, and the telcos were cooperative.

Justice committee  I do, by and large. As long as it's coupled with the appropriate judicial oversight, I think the police should have the appropriate tools to investigate crimes whether they happen online or offline.

Justice committee  I am.

Justice committee  I'm not a U.S. lawyer, but I have certainly been involved in cases in which U.S. authorities have been involved.

Justice committee  I do. The only condition I would add to it...or “condition” isn't the right word. As it's written in Bill C-13, it allows a law enforcement officer who requires the preservation of that data to impose any conditions that officer deems fit, which gives too broad and open-ended a level of discretion to the law enforcement officer.