Information & Ethics Committee on June 21st, 2021

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Thank you very much.

It seems to be an era where we have censorship, and different opinions on YouTube and things like that. I'm hearing from all different sides. As I said earlier on, I really appreciate that you, with your record and your institutional knowledge, are standing up for Canadians' civil liberties.

One thing I've had brought to my attention is a concern about precedent, particularly with regard to interprovincial passes. Mr. Barrett brought up PEI Pass in this regard. It was brought to my attention that Canadians apparently have the right to travel within our own country, but there seems to be a movement in some provinces toward some restrictions on that.

Do you have any red flags or concerns about freedom of movement within our country domestically, as opposed to internationally? I know that internationally we don't have control over what other countries do, but we do have control internally—interprovincially.

[Daniel Therrien]

Health issues are certainly within provincial jurisdiction, and provinces have the jurisdiction to legislate to protect the health of their citizens. Canada, federally, has the authority to protect the health of its citizens when people try to cross the international border.

There is a role for provincial governments and legislatures to regulate in that area, but subject to the same considerations, it is exceptional. It does affect civil rights. It should be science based and time limited.

All federal or provincial governments should have in mind that if these proofs of vaccinations are required given the exceptional times that we're in, then in addition to being time limited, let's narrow the scope of these exceptional measures as much as possible, because there is a risk that what is accepted as possible under normal circumstances will become normal afterwards. It is a concern.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you, Mr. Carrie.

We'll return to Mr. Dong now for five minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Chair.

I too would like to congratulate the commissioner for the extension of his appointment.

It's good to see you again here at the committee.

I've been listening carefully, especially when my opposition colleagues brought up the concerns around the vaccine passport being announced. The fact is, it's a measure to better protect Canadians at the border itself.

Naturally I would think that it has a time limit that is sensitive to the pandemic. In fact, the emergency response, if I'm not mistaken, has a timeline on it. As this is part of the emergency measures, I think there's a time limit to it.

However, I take your advice to heart and I'll bring this up with my colleagues. I encourage all members to survey their constituents on their feedback on this measure, as I will do in my constituency.

One of the things that I've been hearing in my constituency are that people are really frustrated by the increase of online and phone scams, especially during the pandemic. People are really worried that these continued attempts on their privacy will result in someday an intrusion into their private information, or even their identity.

Does your office do any work with the Canada Anti-Fraud Centre in an effort to address these concerns? They're actually looking at parliamentarians and federal offices to help in this situation.

[Daniel Therrien]

We do some, perhaps less than we should or could.

Certainly our role with respect to attempts by ill-intentioned people to access personal information of Canadians mostly has to do with ensuring that government and the private sector have the right security measures in place to protect against these attempts. However, when the level of the attempt reaches a criminal law level, we certainly refer individuals to the authorities, including the fraud centre.

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

The fact that they've been around for a long time and there's been an increase in the number of attempts tells me that they are having reasonable success at it, which is a really terrible thing for the public. We've resourced broader and wider public education in terms of prevention, but do you have any advice on what additional measures we collectively should recommend that the government do to combat this phenomenon?

[Daniel Therrien]

It's a multi-faceted issue. It requires action by a number of actors. Not that long ago, there was an important impetus for advice to individual consumers: Be careful; do not put too much information on the Internet; use strong passwords.

That's all very true. People should be prudent. They should use rigorous passwords. However, I think it would be wrong to put too much responsibility on individual consumers in protecting their data.

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

Right.

[Daniel Therrien]

An important part of the solution, I think, clearly lies in ensuring that government departments and private sector entities have the right security safeguards to protect their consumers or citizens from these attempts. We have seen many, many privacy breaches in the past years in Canada and elsewhere. I can think of Desjardins being a recent case in point, and other companies, which suggests that although companies, particularly large companies, take measures to protect information, it is not the priority that it should be.

My final point is that in order for companies to pay sufficient attention to this, having a law that provides for significant penalties, so that companies that profit from personal information protect it as they should, is part of the solution too.

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

Thank you. I hope to hear from from you beyond the public education aspect to solve this problem.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you, Mr. Dong.

Madame Gaudreau, we'll turn back to you.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Good afternoon again, Commissioner.

It is good to hear about reform and the intention to reframe offences that are difficult to tolerate.

Even before I was elected, there had been many reports looking specifically at the models found in European countries.

I have already heard you say that people have little confidence in what is being done to protect their identity. I am concerned about that. I have given myself the challenge and the mandate to come up with legislation to prevent this, and I hope that we will all work on it. It is not right that private companies have protection models with biometrics, voice recognition, and so on, while the government is faced with so much ongoing fraud.

People keep calling my office, and that worries me. So I'm really glad to see that your concern and your recommendations are actually going to move forward.

With another year in your role, do you plan to do a knowledge transfer in the next Parliament?

I know you have a great team. However, the question must be asked. Do you have a window of opportunity to ensure that your successor has everything they need so that we don't waste any time and can do our job properly?

[Daniel Therrien]

As you say, my team is extremely talented and knowledgeable about privacy issues.

I inherited a group that was already excellent when I took office. I hope to leave my successor with a group that is just as good. As for a transfer of knowledge to a successor, plenty of people in Canada already very knowledgeable about privacy issues. I'm not sure it's a matter of transferring knowledge from one person to another as such.

I think my role over the next year will be to continue to make comments that I hope will be helpful not only in terms of the principles—remember that privacy is a human right—but also in terms of how to articulate those concepts in a way that protects citizens and allows the use of data for public purposes or even private, but still legitimate, purposes. I think that's what my role will be in the coming year.

It will then be up to the government and Parliament to find—

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

However, you agree that, when we receive hundreds of calls from victims of fraud, our position and the decisions we have made are not appropriate to ensure that these people are protected from identity theft.

[Daniel Therrien]

Absolutely.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Okay.

Could I ask one last question, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

No. I do apologize, Madame Gaudreau. I was on mute there. I was going to cut you off before—it's a very short round—so I do apologize.

Mr. Angus, we'll turn to you for the next two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Chair.

We've all dreamed of the lockdowns ending and being able to get back to our lives. One thing that has become clear, though, with the border reopening and people starting to try to recover is what we're going to do on the issue of people who don't get vaccinated. I've talked to many small businesses who have been frustrated throughout the lockdown with militant anti-maskers. Militant anti-maskers are pretty easy to spot, because they're not wearing a mask. Militant anti-vaxxers are a different story. I've talked with labour lawyers who are starting to talk about what they're going to do in workplaces. A broadway show, Springsteen on Broadway, is already limiting who can attend by the type of vaccinations they have.

The need to get on this very quickly, I think, is the issue of the day. I'd like to know what stage your negotiations are at with the government in terms of discussions about how we're going to identify a vaccine passport, what that would look like, and how we can make sure that this is done right so that we can protect the public, and protect theatres and musical events that reopen, but also not overly infringe on privacy rights. Have you been actively engaged in these discussions with government?

[Daniel Therrien]

On the use of the proof of vaccination at the border, I think we'll be able to come up with a solution that works and that is privacy sensitive and protected.

You raise the issue of people who refuse to be vaccinated and the position that puts private companies or employers in. The discussions that we've been involved in are largely with our provincial colleagues, our provincial commissioners of privacy, to develop the guidance that we issued a month or so ago. I think the nub of the issue you're raising with respect to the private sector is that all of these issues are issues of public health. Our federal private sector law is such that private companies can decide to have certain data collection practices provided they meet certain criteria, but I am uncomfortable, to say the least, I would say, with the fact that measures that are intended to enhance public health would be left to private companies, in part because they don't have any expertise in public health matters and in part because the absence of rules will make it difficult for these companies to decide what to do.

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

Well that's my concern. What is your role? This is a public health issue, so how do we keep it within the realm of public policy-making?

[Daniel Therrien]

The statement that we have issued with our provincial colleagues makes clear that it is desirable that the best solution would be for governments, federal and provincial, to set rules. The law is such that governments could decide to give a role for private companies, but my advice certainly is that governments, federal and provincial, should take this on and regulate for public health purposes. They have the expertise. They should regulate.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thanks so much.

We'll turn to Monsieur Gourde, for the next five minutes.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lévis—Lotbinière, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

My thanks also go to Commissioner Therrien. I join my colleagues in congratulating him for his seven years of service to our country. Congratulations. It has certainly gone by very quickly.

You have seen the challenges evolve or change over those seven years. Earlier, you talked about what we should be looking out for in the future.

Can you give us a little review of what has happened in seven years? How do you see the next 10 years?

[Daniel Therrien]

How many hours do we have to answer that question?

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lévis—Lotbinière, QC]

You have four minutes left.