Evidence of meeting #10 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was palantir.
A video is available from Parliament.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Thank you, Madame Gaudreau.
Right now, Mr. Dong has the floor legitimately. We are in committee business, so any member is free to move business when they like. We will certainly attend to the motion that was passed by the committee, but at present Mr. Dong has the right, as a member, to do exactly what he's doing right now with the moving of his motion.
Go ahead, Mr. Dong.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Han Dong Liberal Don Valley North, ON
Thank you, Chair.
I understand that the members of this committee are eager to do a study of their own, based on what they hear from their constituents about things that are important. I completely appreciate that. That's exactly what I'm doing right now.
Especially in a minority government setting, an election can take place at any time, and protection of privacy is so important, because we've seen cases of personal information being used illegally. There's an ongoing investigation happening. That speaks to privacy and the protection of privacy. I think it falls 100% under the mandate of this committee.
I've tried to convince my colleagues, Liberals and opposition alike, to give consideration to the motion I'm proposing and to perhaps see from my perspective how important it is to protect the privacy of Canadian voters, especially in preparation for the next election. I don't know when it's going to be, but I think there's quite a bit of urgency to it.
Let me read the motion again. I don't want to take up any more time.
I move:
That the Committee study ways to further protect Canada's democratic and electoral institutions from cyber and non-cyber interference. This includes studying how new domestic and international stakeholders, as well as other orders of government, can work together to strengthen Canada's whole-of-society preparedness, resilience and civic engagement in the face of evolving threats to democracy.
I yield the floor. I hope the members of the committee would consider my motion and help me to address this very urgent concern.
Thank you.
12:15 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Just so we don't waste any more time, I believe the issue of election preparedness is something that is under the mandate of PROC. Could you determine if that's the case, so that we're not tying up our committee with something that is not within our mandate?
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Mr. Angus, I'm going to suspend for a minute or two so we can get a copy of Mr. Dong's motion. It will be distributed and I'll rule on it.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
Chair, could you make that a break of five or 10 minutes?
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
All right, colleagues, I've seen the motion and there are two significant things in relation to it.
One is that there was a study done—before my time—in regard to Cambridge Analytica. The committee felt at that time that it was within the mandate of this committee.
Due to that historical precedent of this committee, as well as Mr. Dong's introduction, wherein he specifically referenced 60,000 electors who had lost their private information in an Ontario election, it appears to me—although it doesn't specifically say it in the motion—that one of Mr. Dong's intentions is around privacy, and that's particularly within the mandate of this committee. Therefore, I'll rule the motion in order.
Now we will go to Madam Shanahan, who will be speaking to this motion.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
Thank you, Chair.
If I'm to understand it, we will be speaking on Mr. Dong's motion now. It's not a new list.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
That's correct, Madam Shanahan.
I'm smiling because I know that every member has the right to say what they want to say, but you're right that it's Mr. Dong's motion that is on the floor right now.
I will give you the speakers list too, Madam Shanahan. It's Mr. Angus, Mr. Fergus, Madame Gaudreau and Mr. Sorbara.
I should alert you that it is 12:54.
Go right ahead, Madam Shanahan.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
First of all, I certainly welcome the motion that my colleague has put forward, because it addresses some of the concerns we have seen evolving in recent years, as I said in my earlier remarks.
I commend your ruling on this motion, Chair. It really goes to how we are just starting to understand the implications of what it means when....
We think of Elections Canada and the admirable work it does, and how probably as recently as 10 to 15 years ago—maybe a little bit earlier—there was the move from paper-based documentation, which had its own issues, to computerized lists and then to lists that would be kept.... Forgive me if I don't always use the right lingo. This is something that is a learning curve for me as well.
I remember feeling very secure about any data that I had on my computer when I was working as a professional. Then all of a sudden, because we had moved to networks or cloud-based technology, we were warned about holding information that wasn't properly secured by password. Chair, I'm of that early generation that thought “12345” was a pretty good password, but that quickly stopped being the case, right? My children, who are in IT, certainly don't want to hear me speaking now. I have changed it since then, so not to worry, but there is indeed vulnerability of information.
I had the opportunity on the ethics committee in the last Parliament that did the study on Cambridge Analytica to also participate as a substitute when they were looking at the confidentiality and security of client information. The witness the day that I was there was from Equifax. That I could speak to, because I had experience with Equifax when it was basically a telephone service that was sharing credit information about clients and then issuing reports, and we were disturbed at that time.
Yes, it was back in the eighties, but we moved on to the nineties—
12:55 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
I really don't want to interrupt my colleague going back to the 1980s, because I'm sure they will be willing, with Mr. Dong's leadership, to talk for hours and hours and hours and hours on this.
However, we did make the vote, so I'm just asking for clarification, because the meeting is going to end in about a minute and 30 seconds. Shall we just send our witness lists to you so we can begin this? Since this is now committee business, I would assume that committee business has to be taken up at a meeting on committee business and that we will actually be able to start meeting.
Since the Liberals don't want to talk about the parameters of the study, can we just send you witness lists and actually get down to work so that we don't have to deal with another 40 hours of filibuster on this motion?
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I believe that is not a point of order by member of Parliament Angus.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
You're correct.
Go ahead, Madam Shanahan.
In regard to the timing, it's 12:59 p.m. now. Again, I will go to the committee. If there's a desire to continue on to QP, we'll do that.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
Actually, Chair, if you are looking to suspend the meeting at this time, I think that is something we can entertain. However, I am enjoying speaking to my colleague's motion. gain, it's exactly the kind of work we should be discussing here—