Evidence of meeting #119 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 data-opolies.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
12:40 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Thank you.
This has been very fascinating. Ms. Wylie, it's been great to have you bring a citizen's lens to this discussion.
One of the things I'll say, on the positive side of being a Canadian politician in Parliament during the last 14 years, is that we've had some really interesting examples of civic engagement with digital issues. The neutrality battle was very much driven by consumers and citizens, and I think it helped frame the policy in this country. Citizen engagement with copyright influenced two governments to withstand heavy U.S. corporate pressure on the DMCA and notice and take down. We have notice and notice, and we've received all kinds of fist-waving from the Europeans and the Americans, but we've held to a distinctly Canadian position on where we are in the digital realm.
What surprises me about the Cambridge Analytica-Facebook scandals is that we haven't seen as much in the way of grassroots civic engagement, but you were involved in community discussions and you were out having these discussions. Do you believe, from what you're hearing, that this is an issue that citizens are becoming more engaged with, an issue they want to have a voice in and be heard on?
12:40 p.m.
Co-founder, Tech Reset Canada
Absolutely. The predominant emotion is fear. We need to get in there and make that not the only part of the discussion. Fear can often introduce nostalgia, which is just going to bring us back when we need to go forward. We need to be talking about what is not working and is scaring people, as well as what is an opportunity and how to make the best use of it.
12:40 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
In terms of this idea of Google's smart city, one of the concerns we're seeing is that we're talking about massive data monopolies. When we developed 20th-century cities, we didn't have private companies setting up electric grids block by block. We moved towards public utilities. If Google does really well, are we going to see Amazon set up one neighbourhood over, or someone else?
There aren't really other options available for someone big enough to do that. How do we engage in building smart cities, urban centres that offer the absolute optimum of digital engagement, but all within a public space? Do we need to refocus this whole conversation?
12:40 p.m.
Co-founder, Tech Reset Canada
I think we do. I think where the Sidewalk Toronto project went off the rails was that the DRP didn't create conditions. The DRP didn't say the data and the digital infrastructure would be public. When you use procurement as an option, you can set terms within it. It doesn't require master forms. If we want to shape some of these things, we can do it within some of the existing legislation. Are we being clear, however, about the business and responsibility of the state, about where and how the market can help? The market can definitely be a part of it, but those requirements need to be written by the government.
12:40 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Professor, in our country we have about the population of California spread out over the area of the second largest country in the world. Most of our population lives within a stone's throw of the U.S. border. We're not like the Europeans where they can establish separate, complete standards because they have such a large population. We are very interdependent with the U.S. on trade, on everything. They're like our cousin, so it's usually a pretty good relationship.
In terms of our establishing an innovative economy, we've talked a lot here about data sovereignty and its importance, yet we are now getting more and more politically tied in with the big data-opolies.
In terms of the power to utilize data to drive an innovation economy, how important is it to limit that relationship with the data-opolies?
12:45 p.m.
Prof. Maurice Stucke
It's a great question. We've talked mostly about data and personal data, but one thing is to allow the free flow of non-personal data that can also help in innovation—like the workings of a car, like the data that comes from your car that could then go to the car manufacturer and the like—and enable that data as well.
One thing is that you need data in some industries to innovate, so you need access to that data. But then you also need the ability to compete if you're going to exist on a super-platform such as Amazon or Facebook or Apple or Google or any other one of these super platforms.
The third thing is...and this is just to follow up on a point that Bianca made. I was at a conference and what we talked about was that the market will not always provide services. In the United States, when we started off, we felt it was a fundamental right for every citizen to get mail. If you left it to market forces then some remote regions might not necessarily get mail. We didn't say that the market would provide it. No, that was a service that the government provided. I think that we have lost that in the last 30 or 35 years, that there are some essential services that the government has to play a key role in providing, like the mail, like other things that maybe market forces, even in a competitive market, may not provide.
I think that's an important role here so that we get the benefits of a data-driven economy, but in a way so that the economy is inclusive, protects our democracy and also can protect our privacy and improve our well-being.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Zimmer
Thank you, everybody on the committee, but thank you especially, Maurice and Bianca, for coming today to be here with us. We appreciate your efforts on the file and we look forward to talking to you again.
Please send any submissions to our office that you would have for the committee afterwards, any ideas you might not have thought of when you were sitting here. We'd be glad to have them as part of our study.
We'll move to suspend for about a minute until we clear the room. We'll go into committee business quickly to talk about a few things.
[Proceedings continue in camera]
