Evidence of meeting #32 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 39th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was police.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I thank the panel for coming here today. Speaking for myself, I'm very proud of the RCMP and the work they do in this country, and I thank you for your service. My grandfather was an RCMP officer, and we're very proud of his service to Canada.
I hope you're not investigated, Mr. Martin.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
There's one thing that's helpful for us as committee members to know when we're doing a review as we are today, not a line-by-line on a particular bill that's coming. Is there legislation, either provincially or in other jurisdictions, or any actual wording that you'd like to have or would like to suggest in terms of changes to the bill? We are meeting with the commissioner on Thursday, I believe, and that would be an opportunity for us to question the commissioner on some changes. Have you worked on actual wording, or are there other jurisdictions—
Liberal
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
That's right. Thank you, Tom, for pointing that out.
The question is, do you have actual wording that you'd like to see changed, in terms of suggestions?
Madam Earla-Kim McColl
I could make a suggestion. For paragraph 7(3)(c.1), the part with the “lawful authority” and the “may”, we would ask that it stipulate that when a peace officer, acting in the scope of his or her duties, makes a request, that companies are authorized to provide it.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
They would be authorized to provide it. That still does not require them to provide it.
Officer in Charge, National Child Exploitation Coordination Centre, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
That's correct.
Officer in Charge, National Child Exploitation Coordination Centre, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
It clarifies the “may”. What it does is clarify for the companies that they're authorized to allow it, because that's the confusion that exists for them. Even for the companies that do cooperate with us—and many of them do—they're still not very comfortable about the ability to do so.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
So for the 30% or 40% of Internet providers that have been reluctant to provide you with information, you believe that change in wording, the authorization, will give them greater comfort and give you a better position in terms of discussing with them the opportunities for them to give you the information.
Officer in Charge, National Child Exploitation Coordination Centre, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
We do.
Assistant Commissioner, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
We want to take back the risk. The reality is that the way you've worded it, you've transferred the risk to them. In 30% to 40% of the cases, their legal advisers are telling them that they could be held out to dry if they give this information freely.
So we're not asking for an obligation, we're—
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
In terms of the 30% or 40% of ISP people who are not providing information, does the size of the organization matter? Is it the case that the larger the organization is, the more apt they are to cooperate?
Officer in Charge, National Child Exploitation Coordination Centre, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
That's correct. The larger organizations are generally cooperative. A significant number of small ones are also cooperative, but there are between 900 and 1,000 Internet service providers in this country. I will advise you that I haven't contacted all of them—we haven't had occasion to—but since we began taking statistics, I can say that 35% to 40% of them, on the basis of their legal counsel, have declined to cooperate with us.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
That's in section 7, but you did have an issue with section 9.
Officer in Charge, National Child Exploitation Coordination Centre, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Officer in Charge, National Child Exploitation Coordination Centre, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Our wording for section 9 says, “a company shall not disclose any information regarding law enforcement interest without written approval (consent) of the investigator”.
Officer in Charge, National Child Exploitation Coordination Centre, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
The change is that they don't do it voluntarily, nor do they do it upon request of the client, without consulting with the investigator. If we are seeking that information to perhaps notify next of kin, there certainly wouldn't be any harm in letting the person know.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
I'm going to give you my card. Could you e-mail those to me?
