Information & Ethics Committee on Nov. 16th, 2020

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Yes, Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I'm just trying to get clarification from you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Yes, sir.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

We've allowed this motion to go forward. We are now no longer discussing a study on which we just spent the equivalent of 20 meetings trying to get this motion forward. I am asking you to show leadership here and tell us whether, if I send in witness lists, we can begin our study, or do we have to go through another 40 or 60 or 80 hours of Mr. Dong's and Ms. Shanahan's recollections about everything in life? We have work to do. I would like you to show some direction to our committee so that we know where we will be at our next meeting.

Are we on our study, yes or no?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Mr. Angus. I apologize that you feel frustrated. I'm trying to follow the rules of procedure. There's another motion on the floor, and conversation, but I am certain that if you send your witnesses in, then we will be compiling, as Mr. Warkentin said earlier, a witness list for the previous motion.

Go ahead, Madam Shanahan.

Also, you'd need to move a motion in regard to adjournment, if that's what you desire.

Go ahead.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Thank you, Chair. I have the floor, and I would be open to you suspending the meeting if you could confirm that I would be first on the speaking list at our next meeting.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

I don't see any will, really, to suspend the meeting. I mean, if you wanted to move an adjournment, then it would go to a vote, but you can continue on with your comments, Madam Shanahan.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

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—

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Go ahead on a point of order, Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I'm really trying to follow Madam Shanahan. She has explained all the things she's learning about electric cars. I don't know if she wants to make that part of the study, but if the Liberals ae going to talk the clock into the coming weeks about the U.S. electoral system, I think that's very problematic.

Is the United States and what's happening in the States something the Liberals are trying to drag into our committee when we are the ethics and privacy committee? I'm not surprised. It's probably a step up from Mr. Sorbara's digressions into underwear, but this has nothing to do with the issues before our committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Mr. Angus.

I will remind colleagues to stay on the subject at hand and on this particular motion from Mr. Dong.

Go ahead, Madam Shanahan.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I feel the reference to the US election is very relevant. The motion proposes that we look at examples from other countries, as we usually do, right? That is part of our job as parliamentarians: we have to look at what is being done elsewhere, do a study, and learn what works and what does not work.

Coming back to the example of the United States, each state nevertheless prepared for and held a very important election during a pandemic. A great deal of public debate took place. I do not want to repeat all the politics, but a lot of questions have been raised about the integrity of advance polling, mail-in ballots and in-person voting, as well defining an eligible voter, confirming eligibility and counting votes afterwards.

I feel it's a good example, especially since we can study all 50 states. I imagine we can find experts who can tell us how to go about it, even under the current circumstances. I gather we can look at a lot of material to retrieve lessons learned that will help us prepare for our own federal or provincial elections.

Quebec will be holding municipal elections next year, I believe. We feel we have problems at the federal level, and Mr. Dong mentioned that we have problems at the provincial level, so we could very well see problems at the municipal level too.

That is where this committee can be of service to Canadians and to the election workers who are currently preparing for the next election. It's more important than ever that we assist them and help them do their job.

In addition, during the US election campaign, I heard the slogan asking people to vote as if their lives depended on it. It's truer than ever; at least, it probably has not been truer since wartime. People are realizing that voting is not just a civic responsibility.

In his motion, Mr. Dong mentioned the importance of civic engagement, which is always at risk. There have been times in the history of our democracy when people were jaded or sometimes even apathetic. People were sort of disengaged from the electoral process. I remember the first time I heard about the Rhinoceros Party, when I was younger. I think it still exists, actually. Maybe that's not a bad thing, because people need to participate in the electoral process.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

We have a point of order from Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Chair, we are now in the midst of a new filibuster in which we're learning the history of the Rhinoceros Party.

I now understand that Ms. Shanahan wants to study every single state in the United States from the last election. That may be within our purview; I don't think it is. She wants to study every municipality. Now we're learning the history of the Rhinoceros Party.

Mr. Chair, I'm pleading with you. You said this motion was in order. Just how big can this motion get before we actually get back to the business of drawing our witnesses?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Mr. Angus.

Look, Madam Shanahan is speaking to the motion. We're trying to keep it specific to this motion at hand, but Madam Shanahan has the floor right now, and she hasn't ceded the floor yet.

Go ahead, Madam Shanahan.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'm aware that we have spent a lot of time here, but I'm open to the idea of suspending the meeting, if you can confirm that I will be the first person to speak at our next meeting.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

You have the floor now, Madam Shanahan, so just continue.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

No. No—

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

All right, that's fine.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

On a point of order, if Ms. Shanahan is going to start the new 40-hour filibuster, she can talk all night. We will not suspend for her.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Go ahead, Madam Shanahan.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Then, Chair, I just want to finish on this point and—

[Han Dong, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

Mr. Chair, on a point of order—