Evidence of meeting #100 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was used.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
Yes. I agree with that.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Okay. That being the case, of the departments that have deployed this technology.... You said that one of the 13 hasn't, but of the departments and agencies that have, how many times has it been used?
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
How many times has it been used? I might need to get that detailed information for you. I think some of them have said just on a handful of occasions, and others I don't think have specified. I don't have these specific details. I can see if we can provide that subsequently.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Okay.
Subsequent to that, how many times has it been used absent judicial authorization? In a number of the instances that you're suggesting, whether it's fisheries or the RCMP, it sounds to me like it's not actually about employees. It's pursuant to investigations. It's potentially the same with the CRA.
It strikes me that where it's an investigatory body that has due process wrapped around their other investigatory mechanisms, probably this flows within that other due process. You'll do your work on the privacy end, but I'd be a little less concerned if there is sufficient due process already baked into the consideration, whereas if it's used for other reasons—non-investigatory, pursuant to an act, pursuant to existing due process—we might have concerns. Does that sound right?
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
Yes, and that's one of the things that I would look at also in the context of a privacy impact assessment: getting those details. What's the context? What are the safeguards?
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Right, and it seems to me that, in the course of your investigation here and in your questions, you ought to be reaching out.... It would be better—and I appreciate Mr. Green's motion—and you're better placed, actually, to reach out to these other organizations and ask those very same questions and then revert back to us. We could oversee your work because we have powers that you don't, but you have the time and inclination to do the detailed work of asking the questions.
In the course of asking those questions, it would be good to know how many times it's been used absent judicial or other authorization pursuant to existing due processes for investigations and—this is getting to my previous inquiry—two, whether there are instances where they're searching government devices pursuant to an internal investigation like harassment. That's another category where I think it makes a lot of sense to me that it would be used.
Now you get to the subsequent concerns around scope of search, and you will want to inquire as to scope of search. If there are concerns about scope of search, I would again ask you to revert back to us. It would be good to know if this is being used in other instances, any concerning instances, that don't involve investigations that on the face of it seem reasonable.
My last question.... You'll get back to us on a number of uses. On scope of search, as you look to privacy impact assessments and working with these agencies on privacy impact assessments, it would probably be good.... Let's take the concern that Mr. Barrett raised about the difference between a government device and the cloud—fair point. Now, your point back—rightly—is that one has a reasonable expectation in one's privacy, and one has different expectations of privacy in different material. One protects that reasonable expectation of privacy with the bounds of necessity and proportionality.
I would be very interested to know if departments, in the course of their investigations, have gone beyond the bounds of necessity and proportionality. Are they searching the cloud unnecessarily in the course of harassment investigations? Are they searching in health info? I mean, it's a theoretical concern of this committee. Did it actually happen?
If, based upon your investigation, you could come back to this committee with real concerns identified, it would be appreciated.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
Thank you.
I have taken note of all of those elements, and we will follow up and report back to you.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Mr. Dufresne.
Thank you, Mr. Erskine-Smith.
Mr. Villemure, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Commissioner, we have heard a lot of recommendations today, which we will of course consider. Looking ahead, though, what is on the horizon? What are we not seeing? What should the committee be considering to better anticipate things? New things have been coming at us quite quickly in recent years and I think we are still somewhat behind, if not several steps behind.
What would you recommend for the committee to get ahead a bit?
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
In the strategic statement that we published last week and that I will forward to the committee, we talked about three priorities.
The first is modernizing the office and maximizing its impact through new legislation. At the very least, if there is no new legislation, we will have to examine how to protect privacy as much as possible.
The second is technology. We have to get ahead of technology or at least keep up with the pace of developments. That is a big challenge because we can see that people are increasingly adopting it. People like technology, use it and see its benefits. So we have to make sure that their privacy is considered and protected.
The third is protecting children's privacy. This is a very challenging area. It impacts their mental health, their reputation and their data. So there is work to be done in this regard and we will be focusing on these areas.
Internationally, there is also the issue of protecting data that flows across borders.
In short, by focusing on technology and trying to anticipate its trends and uses, and by focusing on children and their privacy, we will be focusing on the future. That is why we will be focusing on these areas. We are also open to recommendations the committee might have for us on other matters.
For my part, I take a broad view: We want to make the most of innovation and technology for the many advantages they offer in multiple fields. Mr. Green talked about the use of technology in health care, and it can also be helpful in sports and music. It can be beneficial and we must not refuse everything. Yet I do not want Canadians to have to make a choice between the advantages of technology and maintaining their privacy. They should not have to make that choice and the burden should not be entirely on individuals. I want Canadians to feel and know that institutions are there to protect them and advise them.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Mr. Villemure, if I understand correctly, Mr. Green has given you his speaking time, so you have another two and a half minutes.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
That's great, thank you, Mr. Chair.
Commissioner, to keep abreast of the latest trends, do you attend the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, for instance? How do you go about that?
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
We are very active in certain communities in Canada and internationally to keep up with developments. Some privacy communities also involve the industry, which presents its products. At our office, we have a technology laboratory that keeps abreast of the latest developments in technology.
That is in fact the office's second priority. We do not want to tell people to stay away from technology because it is dangerous and impacts their privacy. We want to use it responsibly ourselves so we can then tell people how to use it while protecting their privacy. That way, people will not have any reason not to use it because we all know it is possible. We do not just say that it should be used responsibly; we do so ourselves.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Regarding children's privacy, of course we want to prevent potential abuse, harm and injury. For a young person today whose first photograph was taken in their mother's womb, privacy is a vague concept. Entertainment often comes before protecting privacy. Most young people typically say the same thing, that they have nothing to hide, something you no doubt also hear. Yet we know that is not the case.
What will it take to educate the next generation for them to properly understand the importance and value of privacy?
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
You're right. Young people are very familiar with technology, probably better than older people in some cases. We need to strengthen the awareness of privacy though, among young people and their parents alike. I am thinking of parents who overshare, for instance, since parents often post information on social media. The children suffer the consequences of that for a long time. The legal system therefore needs to be prepared to protect their privacy and we have to have those conversations.
I would like to see schools institute mandatory instruction to make young people aware of protecting their privacy. Since education is clearly under provincial jurisdiction, we work closely with our counterparts. We issued a joint statement on protecting the privacy of young people that calls upon industry, governments and educators.
Just as we teach children about safety and tell them not to get into a car with a stranger for instance, we should warn them that, even if there is something very interesting, they need to think about the consequences.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Last week, a constituent was telling me that her nine‑year‑old daughter does gymnastics and went on YouTube to watch gymnastics videos. One thing led to another and she happened upon pornographic images of young gymnasts. To attract her, her privacy had to be compromised. I was shocked that this little girl who was watching videos of an Olympic gymnast ended up somewhere else on the Internet. So action is needed to protect children's privacy and to raise their awareness.
Thank you very much.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Mr. Villemure and Mr. Dufresne.
That brings today's meeting to a close.
Mr. Dufresne, on behalf of Canadians and the committee, I want to thank you for your testimony today on this very important matter.
Thank you also to Ms. Ives.
We have a couple of items to deal with.
First, I'll go to Mr. Barrett.
Mr. Barrett, you have an oral motion that you'd like to put before the committee. I understand that you've spoken to committee members, and they all are in agreement with it. If you would put the motion on the floor, then we could have some discussion, if need be, on it.
Go ahead, sir.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Would you like me to put the motion on the floor and then speak to it very briefly, Mr. Chair?
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
The motion that's been circulated is as follows. I move:
That the committee send a letter of condolences to the family of former Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson that recognizes her lifetime of public service, and that the committee report to the House an expression of its condolences on her passing.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Okay.
The motion has been moved, and I'm going to rule it in order.
Go ahead, Mr. Barrett, please.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Mary Dawson passed on December 24, 2023. I want to share a couple of notable points about her and why this is so important. I appreciate colleagues' agreement for this to be before committee and to report it to the House.
She wasn't just the Ethics Commissioner. She was pretty remarkable. Her fingerprints are all over very important parts of our history, including her having drafted the Access to Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Canada Health Act, the Official Languages Act, the Competition Act, the Customs Act and the Young Offenders Act.
She was made a member of the Queen's Counsel in 1978 and became associate chief legislative counsel in the early 1980s. Aside from being the associate deputy minister of justice for nearly two decades, she was particularly proud of her constitutional work, including being the final drafter for the patriation package on the Constitution Act, 1982, and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
That is a very brief, incomplete and not fulsome summary of her impressive service as a public servant to our country and her work as commissioner in calling balls and strikes. I think the mark of a good Ethics Commissioner is one who makes members of all parties equally uncomfortable, and she did that well.
Canada was well served by her contributions, and I appreciate colleagues' consideration of the motion.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
I want to thank you for moving that motion, Mr. Barrett, and for those kind words on Ms. Dawson.
I never had an opportunity to deal with her directly, but certainly when you take the chair you're aware of the invaluable contributions she made, and not only as the Ethics Commissioner but, as you've cited, just what a phenomenal experience and a life of public service that she gave to this country.
Thank you for this motion.
Ms. Damoff, go ahead, please, on the motion.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Thank you, Chair.
Just very briefly, I want to thank my colleague for bringing this motion forward—we of course are happy to support it—but also for the quite eloquent description of Ms. Dawson.
I also didn't have the opportunity to work with her or know her, but I think you've done a really good job of describing her for Canadians, and I just want to thank you for bringing this forward. I pass on condolences from our side as well.