Information & Ethics Committee on Feb. 2nd, 2017

[Dominic Rochon]

Unfortunately, I don't have much to add. I think Mr. Burt was very eloquent in the way he covered those points.

Again, we're in a tough position, not having used the act, either to disclose or receive anything. It's hard for us then to be able to give you an educated opinion as to whether or not we've effectively added this tool to the tool box and that it somehow has struck a better balance than what existed or a worse balance than what existed. The tension continues to exist, as Mr. Burt so eloquently put it. This is a new element that, in my personal opinion, looks like a framework that will facilitate a better understanding of each other's mandates, and possibly then, a better discipline can be put toward the sharing of the information. However, the proof will be over time as it's being used as to whether or not that balance is struck.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Some critics are calling for its immediate repeal. Would that be unwise in your opinion?

[Dominic Rochon]

It's hard to say. It's too soon to tell.

[The Chair, Conservative, Blaine Calkins]

Thank you very much, Mr. Kelly.

We now move on to Mr. Long for five minutes, please.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Thank you, Chair, and thank you to our witnesses today.

I'm going to go from left to right and start with you, Mr. Burt. Maybe you could give a yes or no or a short follow-up. Do you think SCISA is required for the protection of our national security?

[Stephen Burt]

SCISA provides a useful framework for determining whether or not information should be shared in the protection of our national security. It potentially could make decision-making on sharing or not sharing faster.

[Dominic Rochon]

I would agree with him and add that it is more efficient.

[Donald Roussel]

Yes, and we have concrete examples from the past that we can give to the committee on how it would have helped us in the past on fairly complex issues.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Mr. Burt, in your opinion, do you feel there was a compelling explanation provided as to why previous laws were inadequate? In other words, do you think there was a strong enough explanation given to change and not just stay with what we had?

[Stephen Burt]

When the legislation was going through?

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Yes.

[Stephen Burt]

To be honest, I wasn't in a business that would have had me paying attention to it when the legislation was going through. But I have certainly lived situations in the past, as Monsieur Roussel said, where I can imagine that this legislation, had it existed, would have been useful.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Okay.

Mr. Roussel.

[Donald Roussel]

Yes, and even worse than that, some of our legislation prohibited, prior to that, some exchange of information.

[Dominic Rochon]

I'll echo what we've been saying, but maybe I'll take a different tack. I think National Defence, Foreign Affairs, or Global Affairs Canada, all had authority to disclose information, which means sharing information. All of those authorities would not necessarily be clear to each other in terms of the security intelligence community, or even beyond that, in terms of understanding each other's disclosure.

I'll use FINTRAC as an example. They are explicitly allowed in their legislation to be able to disclose information. It's very clear in that legislation. It's perhaps not so clear in terms of understanding the crown prerogative that Mr. Burt brought up in his opening remarks. SCISA provides a better framework, I think, to be able to understand each other's mandates and provide a mechanism whereby the sharing of information with the 17 recipient identified entities would be clearer.

That's the way I would couch it.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

As a last question, would you agree that SCISA has compounded a crisis of public confidence about surveillance in Canada? We live in a world where sometimes perception becomes reality. Would you agree with that?

[Stephen Burt]

That it has compounded a crisis...?

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

About surveillance, about privacy in Canada.

[Stephen Burt]

I can't really express an opinion on that. I would hesitate to characterize the current concern with surveillance in Canada as a crisis. I think some people are concerned about some things.

I would say, just to pick up on Monsieur Rochon's last point, that one of the nice things about SCISA is that now, having shared a piece of information under SCISA, I have a mechanism to then go back to the organization I shared it with and say, “Hey, what did you do with that piece of information we shared?” It's being tracked, in a way. Previously, under the crown prerogative, we probably would have shared information regardless, and there would have been less of a process around it.

I think the act is very clear in what it lays out in terms of what that process is. I think if people have concerns, they can probably be addressed in the reading of the act.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Okay.

Mr. Rochon.

[Dominic Rochon]

I would simply answer “no” to your question, because I don't think so.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Mr. Roussel.

[Donald Roussel]

No.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

You don't think there's a perception out there of a crisis in public confidence at all.

[Donald Roussel]

I don't see a crisis. We don't feel it in our department.