Evidence of meeting #113 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was know.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Jeff Silvester  Chief Operating Officer, AggregateIQ

10:15 a.m.

Chief Operating Officer, AggregateIQ

Jeff Silvester

Yes. Certainly there's an opportunity to provide clarity to people about what information they're providing and what it's going to be used for, either right away or in the future.

One of the challenges with Facebook, for example, is that when I signed up a long time ago—and I'm not on there now—its privacy statement may have said one thing and then 10 years later it's had a number of different updates. Now it's doing all of this different advertising; it wasn't advertising when I started. In that respect, there do need to be clear statements and clear guidelines. I think there's a role for government to provide that legislation and those regulations so that companies know what they need to provide to consumers, voters, political parties, and whomever to let them know what's going to happen, what they can do get their information back if they don't want it to be used, and what type of notification requirements there are. All of that stuff should really be included.

With respect to going as far as the GDPR does in all of the ways, I know there are a number of services in the U.K. and Europe that have had to shut down, not because they're doing anything wrong, but simply because of the IP restrictions and limitations. They're working on ways to work within the rules to still provide those services. We have to be cautious about how that's done, but there's certainly a lot of room for opportunity there.

10:15 a.m.

Conservative

Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON

We saw in recent weeks since the GDPR came into effect that several dozen American news organizations have actually closed access to EU users because of their concerns that they may be in violation of the GDPR.

Hypothetically, if we were to believe everything that you and Mr. Massingham have told us in the two sessions of testimony, would it be fair for us, nonetheless, to conclude that in some ways you have been dealing, or may have been dealing, in stolen goods?

10:15 a.m.

Chief Operating Officer, AggregateIQ

Jeff Silvester

No. I don't think we've dealt in stolen goods as you're describing it, in so far as that all the information that we've received from clients is information that, in itself, they have obtained correctly.

10:15 a.m.

Conservative

Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON

How can you be sure?

10:15 a.m.

Chief Operating Officer, AggregateIQ

Jeff Silvester

As I said earlier, the information that we receive is entirely consistent with that you get as a registered candidate.

As I was saying to Mr. Erskine-Smith earlier—and I think we were talking about it earlier as well—it is entirely possible that they decide who to put into that list by some other means, and I don't know what those means are. The actual information that I get from them in order to run ads or to load into their political CRM is information that they legally have.

There is opportunity even in that, in the legislation, to define what is allowed and what isn't allowed, and the companies will always work within those rules. It's just a matter of defining for them what those rules are and giving them clear guidelines to follow. The first thing is very clear disclosure as to what that's being used for.

10:15 a.m.

Liberal

The Vice-Chair Liberal Nathaniel Erskine-Smith

Thanks very much.

I know Mr. Angus was worried about running out with three minutes, so he has seven minutes this time around.

10:15 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The last time you were here we were trying to get a sense of how your very obscure company in Victoria got a huge contract for both the Vote Leave and the BeLeave campaigns.

You said that it was through a competition. How did you get that contract?

10:15 a.m.

Chief Operating Officer, AggregateIQ

Jeff Silvester

We were introduced by an individual, and I spoke about this—just a second....

10:15 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Who was the individual?

10:20 a.m.

Chief Operating Officer, AggregateIQ

Jeff Silvester

The individual's name was Mark Gettleson. He introduced us and let us know that they were looking for advertising providers. He then sent us an introductory email to Vote Leave. We then took over from that, had conversations with Vote Leave, created a proposal, sent them a proposal, and they selected us. Then we started doing work for them.

10:20 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Was Mr. Gettleson involved in getting you the contract for BeLeave?

10:20 a.m.

Chief Operating Officer, AggregateIQ

10:20 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Gettleson has come forward as a whistle-blower, and he said that he helped coordinate BeLeave as the front for Vote Leave in getting this extra money, in setting up the bank logs and the emails, and he put you in that position.

Were you aware that he was doing this with BeLeave?

10:20 a.m.

Chief Operating Officer, AggregateIQ

Jeff Silvester

No. The last interaction we had with him was when he introduced us to Vote Leave in that campaign. I have spoken with him since, but that was well after Brexit.

10:20 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Okay.

Since your colleague is not here, I want to go back to the conversation with the 22-year old. I have nothing against being 22. I was 22 at one time as well, except nobody gave me £625,000 to affect the biggest referendum in British history. At one point, your colleague, who's not here, said to Mr. Grimes, “you're on track to spend almost 300k USD today”. That half the budget in a single day. Would that have been at the end of this 10-day campaign?

10:20 a.m.

Chief Operating Officer, AggregateIQ

Jeff Silvester

I don't recall the exact time frame, but the money from BeLeave came in three different chunks. It didn't all come in as £625,000 at the same time.

10:20 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Yes, I know.

10:20 a.m.

Chief Operating Officer, AggregateIQ

Jeff Silvester

I think we provided the invoices to you and I think the first one was £400,000.

10:20 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Yes, £400,000.

10:20 a.m.

Chief Operating Officer, AggregateIQ

Jeff Silvester

And so they did set very aggressive advertising targets, and we worked within those terms.

10:20 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Okay.

We talked about this in the first round, but I'm just trying to get a clearer picture of it. So Mr. Massingham said to Mr. Grimes, “you're on track to spend almost 300k USD today.... ddi you need me to grab some money for you?”

You've been involved in political campaigns. Don't you think it's highly unusual for your data geeks to be in charge of getting money for a campaign? How does that work?

10:20 a.m.

Chief Operating Officer, AggregateIQ

Jeff Silvester

As I mentioned earlier, what Mr. Massingham was referring to is that Mr. Grimes said to ask if we could transfer some of that money back to him that had been provided, because they had some expenses. Mr. Massingham was saying in the email that if you want us to transfer money back, let us know. It wasn't that we were getting money for anything else. We were providing their money back to them because they—

10:20 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

He doesn't say that. He asks, “Do you need me to grab some money for you?”

I find that very unusual phrasing. And then he said, no, it was fine, that Victoria was sorting. Is that Victoria Woodcock from Vote Leave?

10:20 a.m.

Chief Operating Officer, AggregateIQ

Jeff Silvester

I believe so, but I don't know for sure.

10:20 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Okay.

So it was perfectly fine for that £625,000 to be transferred because donations are legal, correct?