Just to clarify, I am happy to speak to my colleague's motion, because I do find it very germane to the kind of discussion that we need to be having here at this committee.
I want to make some further remarks on how critical it was, at that time that I had the opportunity to sit on the ethics committee of the previous Parliament, to speak to the fact that Equifax, to the knowledge I had, was not always careful with the accuracy and the privacy of the information that was being collected on its customers.
This was even more critical in our modern day and age. I remember that other members of the committee at that time, particularly our colleague who is still in the House, Mr. Zimmer certainly took up that cause as well.
I am very pleased to see that we will be able to do further work in this area, particularly with regard to democratic and electoral institutions, because I think we are seeing that the technology, the ways of practice, the industry of data collection, and particularly personal data collection, is an industry in its own right.
That information and that way of working can be used to collect financial information or voter information, and the key elements of that type of collection are exactly those things. I know that my colleague Madame Gaudreau is very concerned about the issue of fraudulent identity occurring with the use of key personal facts about individuals that are collected in this manner by this industry. We're talking about name, address, date of birth, gender, social insurance number and other types of identifiers that can be harvested and then used in some kind of unintended or fraudulent manner.
Chair, I remember when the biggest concern of anybody, man or woman, with their wallet or their purse was that their money would be stolen if they were robbed. The money would be emptied out and the rest of the information—this was before credit cards were so common—such as personal identity cards, would be left behind.
At some point in time that was reversed, and it was almost that someone's money would be left behind but their credit cards would be stolen, and so would their identity cards. That became the real object of the theft.
I think that the motion before us is commendable in that we are talking about the protection of democratic and electoral institutions from something that is very new on the horizon. Well, it's new in that we heard about it in detail in 2016, but even prior to that with various national referendums that were occurring. I don't know if the jury is still out on what happened with the Brexit vote, but it certainly would be a case study in what that kind of cyber-interference could look like.
I appreciate that Mr. Dong has included non-cyber-interference, because it's like there's new school and there's old school, but the bottom line is that there is interference. We are not strictly a technology committee; that's not our role. Our role is the principle of protecting privacy, the principle of protecting citizens' rights, so however those rights can be compromised is worthy of study by this committee.
As Mr. Dong further stipulates, this would include studying new domestic and international stakeholders, as well as other orders of government. I think this motion recognizes that this is not a problem specific to Canada—far from it—and it is not a problem specific to the federal order of government—far from it. This is not specific to even.... There are various types of elections that can occur. There are various democratic processes that can occur.
I think that it is useful to have a large scope for what we would be studying and the types of witnesses we could call. I take it that there would be expert witnesses in that group, and it certainly is interesting that we will be able to see how this area is evolving.
Mr. Chair, I have my own motions that I would like to move, but I recognize.... As I say, I'm learning about this area, and there are different issues that come up regarding 5G and how all our devices will be connected and talking to each other and so on. As a driver of a fully electric car—I'm very proud of that—I recognize that there are software connections between my car, unbeknownst to me, and the dealership and the manufacturer.
As I say, these are areas that I'm learning about, but as a private citizen, I don't have all of the information, and maybe it would affect some decisions at those decision-making points.
Getting back to the motion at hand, I certainly agree that this is a very important motion and I applaud my colleague for bringing it forward, because we are talking about overarching democracy, and it would allow us to intervene in all these different areas. I'm not sure how many meetings the committee would like to spend on this motion, but I could certainly see it being an in-depth study. I would look for Mr. Dong's input there, as well as input from other colleagues. This study could help to strengthen Canada's whole-of-society preparedness, and I think that's where an in-depth study may be the most....
We're looking at the possibility of a federal election at any time, as we know. There are also other orders of government that are dealing with the possibility of an election during the pandemic, which of course will require even more reliance on digital means. I would suggest that this may be exactly the thing that we need to be looking at, because we have a tendency as legislators to react after the fact, whereas here, as a committee, we have an opportunity to do a study that would allow us to prepare and find ways to strengthen our electoral process so that citizens have confidence in those election results however they transpire.
Recently, people in Quebec and elsewhere have been watching the US election with great interest. For those of us who are not very familiar with the US electoral process, the main point is that each state manages the electoral system, and that the states have, I believe, made—