Evidence of meeting #117 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 vote.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:40 a.m.
Liberal
Frank Baylis Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC
I didn't ask you that, and you're under oath. Now, we're going to get an answer out of you sooner or later.
I'm sorry, Mr. Chair, but....
Please, just answer me. You have made a very blanket statement that there was no collusion. These are your words: You were “in full compliance with...all legal and regulatory requirements in all jurisdictions where it operates”.
Those are your words. I have a simple question. Is their evidence incorrect, yes or no?
11:45 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, AggregateIQ
I'm not going to comment on evidence I haven't seen. I can only tell you what we did. We did not set up any of these....
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
Frank Baylis Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC
Chair, if you could make sure that all that other evidence I asked for is provided to us, I'd appreciate that.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Zimmer
Yes, absolutely. The clerk will follow through with that.
Next up for five minutes is Mr. Kent.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
Thanks, Chair.
Mr. Massingham, coming back to the issue of the data that you received in the form you received it, were you aware, or have you been made aware, of Mr. Wylie's testimony before this committee on May 29 of this year?
September 27th, 2018 / 11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
Well, just to be specific, basically, when you and Mr. Silvester appeared before a committee you denied—again, as you did this morning—receiving any raw data improperly harvested by Facebook.
What Mr. Wylie said—again, this is to the committee in Britain—was this:
You can't build a targeting platform that doesn't have access to data, because then what are you targeting...? One of the things I provided...is an email from AIQ that specifically references searching the SCL databases on the Ripon project.
Mr. Wylie concluded his answer by saying:
Frankly, I'm surprised and really disappointed that Jeff Silvester and Zack Massingham have decided to try to obfuscate or hide what happened. You'll have to ask them why it is that they are taking this line, but in my view
—this is Mr. Wylie's view—
that's just not true. What value would they offer...if they did not use any of the data?
Can you answer that today?
11:45 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, AggregateIQ
We built a software tool to present their data. We were like software developers for them. Their clients access various audiences to create lists, and we helped SCL service their clients that they had, to help use the tool.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
When Mr. Silvester testified in the U.K., he described the Ripon tool as something that would help door-to-door canvassing. Mr. Wylie had again a very different version of Ripon, saying it was the software that directly utilized the algorithms from the Facebook data.
How do you explain this contradiction between what Mr. Silvester testified and what Mr. Wylie testified?
11:45 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, AggregateIQ
The tool we built for SCL was a plain and simple protocol CRM that contained SCL model data with scores. It would be a name and address, a phone number, sometimes an email, and then turn-up propensity or where you might rate along some issues—stuff like that. That's what was in the Ripon platform.
Modelling didn't happen in Ripon. To the best of my understanding, all that happened within SCL's ecosystem that they built themselves, that took in all the data from various different vendors. What was put into Ripon was only the output of whatever they had done with that.
Again, it was a simple-protocol CRM.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
Can you explain to the committee why you and Mr. Silvester are so isolated in the testimony that you provide to us, that you've provided to the British Office of the Information Commissioner, to the U.K. parliamentary study, and I assume to the B.C. Privacy Commissioner and the Canadian Privacy Commissioner? Why are you so isolated in the facts that you argue, at odds with all the other testimony and the findings of these other commissions that you've misrepresented what the company did?
11:45 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, AggregateIQ
I think it's because we're telling you the truth. The simple matter of this is that we're software developers. We're not modellers. We help our clients place ads sometimes.
The spin that has been put on these proceedings and reports and findings isn't what we like to go through at all. As you know, it's been quite difficult on me. We would like to help you find the truth, to explain how everything works and our piece of that.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
Are you saying that you and Mr. Silvester are the fall guys, that the others have lied about what AIQ is and what it's done?
11:50 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, AggregateIQ
I don't believe we're fall guys. I simply think there's a misunderstanding of what we have done and have built for SCL or others.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Mona Fortier Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Hello, Mr. Massingham.
I want to point out that I usually ask my questions in French, except for today. Although our interpreters work very hard, I really want to make sure we understand each other today and do not want to waste any time.
So I will ask you my questions in English.
I would like to take this opportunity, like many of my colleagues here, to reiterate my frustration with your communication with the chair and the clerk of this committee. You've mentioned on numerous occasions your desire to co-operate fully with this committee and our study. I will tell you that my belief has been tested. When you did not appear before us last spring, I was very disappointed. I'm hoping today that we have a conversation that will give me answers.
With that, I'm hopeful you will be able to add some clarity to specific questions.
I'll start, if I may. How many email addresses do you possess? Did you have a BeLeave email address? Did you have a specific—
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Mona Fortier Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
I'm not done.
Did you have any specific AggregateIQ, or Gmail, or any other domain emails that were specifically for this identified campaign?
11:50 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, AggregateIQ
No, I did not have a BeLeave email address.