Industry committee  I think in practice, when we're dealing with issues of particular notoriety and severity, we're acting quickly and we're following those guidelines.

Industry committee  No. I would say it's wholly about providing authoritative and reliable information to the user.

Industry committee  We try to apply the policy as broadly and effectively as possible. The reality is that we're facing circumstances from day to day where we're dealing with misinformation on a much more significant scale. What you're describing here would sound in our conversation as something that would need to be deliberated, but at the time—

Industry committee  We are acting as a platform, but we're looking to informed sources to give us the information so that we can ensure that authoritative information is going to our users. We also take steps—

Industry committee  I think one of the advantages of our platform is that there is ongoing debate and opposing points of view in the content that is made available by our users.

Industry committee  I'm afraid I don't have an estimate for you.

Industry committee  No. However, I'll say that the reason Apple and Google are working together is a recognition that we need collaboration across platforms so there is the greatest possibility for public health authorities to make that option available to our users.

Industry committee  No, we're looking to public health authorities, who have the experience and the expertise to provide guidance on what they consider authoritative information.

Industry committee  Sorry. Do you mean why apply the guidelines and battle misinformation on YouTube?

Industry committee  I'm sorry. I can't speak to possibilities. I can only speak to the practical experience we've had.

Industry committee  The policy itself is applied to instances where there's an explicit threat to personal safety or health and where there's the possibility of personal injury. In the case that you're describing on the use or non-use of masks, we would still turn to the WHO and public health authorities to give us guidance.

Industry committee  Thank you for the question. Yes, I think I remember your bill and when you tabled it. There are many elements that are complementary to the conversation we've been having, up until this crisis, around reforming Canada's data protection laws. I want to underline that there's certainly a conversation that we had around PIPEDA, but also around the Privacy Act, especially in the context of the conversation we're having today in regard to modernizing and recognizing, as many of witnesses have reinforced, the need for explicit consent from users, and then, in defined circumstances, for the use and then withdrawal of data that has been shared.

Industry committee  Really, it's a technological progression. The reality that exists right now is that we need an application programming interface so the public health authorities can develop the apps that allow them to build that relationship with the user and request that they allow tracking through Bluetooth.

Industry committee  Speaking from my point of view as a one-time history student, it has been used in the past. I can't give you any judgment on whether or not it's effective and how we contain the virus. What I'll state is that we, at Google, are certainly an environment where we're recognizing that we need to modify our services and provide tools to public health authorities so that they can explore options.

Industry committee  If that's directed to me, I can't speak to the specific apps. What I can speak to is that at Google, what we'll be exchanging is anonymous Bluetooth beacon information that enables the apps to identify and then notify individuals who have been in proximity to each other. As for the apps themselves, it will be up to the public health authorities to decide what sort of information they are going to request from users.