Evidence of meeting #40 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 sharing.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Blaine Calkins
Did you get your answer, Mr. Bossio? Okay.
Mr. Erskine-Smith is next.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
I have some yes-or-no questions for the most part.
Mr. Plouffe, you mentioned the Privacy Commissioner's preference for necessity, as opposed to the relevance threshold.
Could the three of you answer whether you support the necessity threshold, yes or no?
December 8th, 2016 / 12:45 p.m.
Commissioner, Office of the Communications Security Establishment Commissioner
I mentioned that already. I said I am in general agreement.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
12:45 p.m.
Senior Director, Operations, Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Yes.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
12:45 p.m.
Chair, Security Intelligence Review Committee
It's not for me to comment about it. The government will decide.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
We have testimony that the relevance standard was created for disclosing institutions, and it wasn't to change the mandate of the 17 recipient institutions. We have had some testimony that we ought to clarify in black and white that the recipient institutions have to operate within their mandate to avoid any confusion.
Would you agree with that recommendation, yes or no?
12:45 p.m.
Commissioner, Office of the Communications Security Establishment Commissioner
I would say so.
12:45 p.m.
Chair, Security Intelligence Review Committee
Excuse me; I missed the point.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
It's to clarify in black and white that for the recipient institutions, their mandates have not changed, and that CSIS remains subject to “strictly necessary” and must operate—
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Fair enough.
Mr. Evans, would you like to comment?
12:45 p.m.
Senior Director, Operations, Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police
When I spoke of “relevant” and “necessary”, I was talking about the relationship between the RCMP and our commission as opposed to the sharing of the RCMP.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Then I'll get your answer differently for my first question.
Under SCISA, institutions can disclose information if it's relevant to the recipient institution's mandate. It does not change the recipient institution's mandate.
I have two questions. Should the recipient institution be subject to a necessity collection requirement, and should we clarify in black and white that SCISA has not changed their mandate, because there has been some confusion in the academic literature to this effect?
12:45 p.m.
Senior Director, Operations, Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police
I would agree with that.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Perfect.
My last question is about the review bodies. This picks up on what Mr. Kelly was asking about with the reliability of information.
Whatever the review body structure is, whether it's the three of you working together or whether the Privacy Commissioner is reviewing those other 14 agencies and their information sharing, and until we establish a more perfect solution, is it important that we have these review bodies and that we give them the power to compel the deletion of information where we have concerns with the sharing of the information and the reliability of it?
12:45 p.m.
Commissioner, Office of the Communications Security Establishment Commissioner
You're talking about the review bodies?
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
The review bodies of the 17 recipient agencies under SCISA. Should they have the power to compel the deletion of information where that information is found to be unreliable or improperly shared?
12:45 p.m.
Commissioner, Office of the Communications Security Establishment Commissioner
The law will apply. If the threshold is relevance, fine. If it's not relevant, it should be deleted. If the threshold is necessity, then it's a higher threshold. If it's not necessary, then it should be deleted.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Should the review bodies have the power to compel the recipient 17 agencies to delete the information?
12:45 p.m.
Commissioner, Office of the Communications Security Establishment Commissioner
I don't think so. This is not within the mandate in my view of a review body.