Information & Ethics Committee on Feb. 6th, 2024

[France Gratton]

Once the software was purchased in 2010, we conducted a series of checks to determine if a privacy impact assessment was required. Based on the program we were setting up, the tool we were using and the way the information was going to be managed, it was not considered necessary.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

I see. Is that the answer you gave Radio-Canada during its investigation?

[France Gratton]

Yes, we responded by saying that we had followed the list of checks in line with a privacy impact assessment.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. McCrorie, did you say the same thing to Radio-Canada as part of its investigation, meaning that you were following the process, or did you say no?

[Aaron McCrorie]

What we did was we outlined the process that we were going through. Very similar to our colleagues in the Correctional Service, we worked with our internal colleagues to assess the need. What we determined was that, rather than doing a PIA for each individual device, what we need to do is do a PIA for the program as a whole, so it's not only how we use those individual devices but how they are being used in the context of the program.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Did you respond to Radio-Canada in the course of its investigation?

[Aaron McCrorie]

I’m sorry, but I have to confirm the exact words we used to respond to Radio-Canada.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Very well.

Mr. Larkin, I’m listening.

[D/Commr Bryan Larkin]

I would say the same thing. I’m not sure what we said to Radio-Canada, but we will check.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Very well.

Ms. Gratton, you talked earlier about proportionality when using this tool. Could you tell us more?

[France Gratton]

I said we use the tool on seized devices. We’ve seen a marked increase in the number of incidents involving drones, as well as a significant increase in the number of cellphones seized in facilities.

Accordingly, to collect security intelligence, we use these systems to extract data and prevent other incidents. As for proportional use of this tool, it is indeed necessary to fight contraband and prevent security incidents.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Would you say it’s easier to get information with the help of that tool even if, in the end, it requires authorizations that are just as hard to get?

[France Gratton]

No, it’s not easier. The information we get this way is compiled with security intelligence we already have. It helps us move the needle in our efforts to prevent contraband materials from getting into our facilities.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. McCrorie, I have the same question for you: do you use this tool because it’s easier? Is the information you get this way more reliable, even if it involves a privacy impact assessment and other processes?

[Aaron McCrorie]

I don't think it's a question of more.... If you have a device that's locked with a password, we need the technology to open up that device. That's why, in another era, we would have had a locksmith open a box that would have had receipts in it, for example. Now, when we're dealing with firearms smuggling, we'll have electronic receipts on a cellphone or on a computer. Our only way to access that information is to unlock the device and then translate information on that device into a format that can be used in a court of law.

It's not a question of its being easier. It's the technology we need to use to keep up with the technology that criminals are using.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

I see.

Mr. Gagné, I think you have an answer for this question.

[Nicolas Gagné]

Mr. Chair, I share Mr. McCrorie’s point of view. Technological tools help to get the evidence needed during investigations. It’s not a matter of it being easier, it’s a matter of getting as much access as possible to evidence.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Do you use those tools to get around the password that locks the phone or to get the information on the phone?

[Nicolas Gagné]

It depends on several factors, like the brand, the model or the types of phone locking mechanisms. Getting around the password is just one of many things the tool allows us to do.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

That’s perfect.

Ms. Gratton, at this committee, we’re trying to assess different situations in order to propose legislative improvements that would lead to better public policy.

Protecting privacy is a subject that’s been on everyone’s mind for some time. People are worried. In the various testimonies we've heard at committee, people have told us that when they click “I accept” online, they don’t always know what they’re accepting. They know they want to get the software, for example, but we are realizing that education on privacy isn’t adequate.

Another of the committee’s mandates is to maintain public trust in institutions like the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the Canada Border Services Agency and the Correctional Service of Canada.

Some articles in the media, such as those published by the CBC/Radio-Canada, can sow doubt in the public’s mind. As soon as the article in question was published, people turned to me to ask what was going on. They were worried. Do you think you can reinforce the public’s trust through this morning’s testimony on how you use technological tools?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Mr. Villemure, your witness will have to answer very quickly, because your time is up.

[France Gratton]

When it comes to trust, it’s important to emphasize that these technological tools help us make our facilities safer. Since they’re used on contraband cellphones, it means they’re used for very specific purposes. The information extracted from cellphones is used only for intelligence purposes. In that way, I think we can show that the tools we are talking about are not used outside of the mandate.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Very well, thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you.

Mr. Green, you have six minutes. Go ahead, please.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you.

I was sharing with my colleague that I am finding it difficult to imagine that, out of the hundred-plus organizations that I just requested send us back information, we're going to see a huge deviation in the answers that we're receiving.

I think we've established—feel free to correct me if I'm wrong—that the use of this technology is an investigative use, whether it's through law enforcement agencies or through staff in terms of federal employees. I am to understand that most of you have this within the legal framework.

Have any of your agencies used it with your employees?