Evidence of meeting #101 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 use.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:35 p.m.
Deputy Commissioner, Specialized Policing Services, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
We've used it on one occasion for an internal matter that was on consent, actually. We used digital forensic tools. It was a consent matter.
12:35 p.m.
Vice-President, Intelligence and Enforcement, Canada Border Services Agency
We haven't, to my knowledge.
12:35 p.m.
Assistant Commissioner, Correctional Operations and Programs, Correctional Service of Canada
No, we haven't used it on employees.
12:35 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Forgive me. I'm not impugning anybody, but drones are one way that contraband comes in. It's sometimes suggested that staff are, on rare occasions, involved in bringing in contraband.
Have you ever had an occasion to investigate or use this technology with any of the corrections staff?
12:40 p.m.
Assistant Commissioner, Correctional Operations and Programs, Correctional Service of Canada
No. There would be occasions when we would investigate staff. We would not use specific legal software. It would have to be specifically within an investigation.
12:40 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Is it safe to say that all of your staff are issued federally issued devices?
12:40 p.m.
Deputy Commissioner, Specialized Policing Services, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
A large portion of them are, yes. That would be correct.
12:40 p.m.
NDP
12:40 p.m.
Vice-President, Intelligence and Enforcement, Canada Border Services Agency
The mandate of my organization is outward-facing. We do criminal investigations involving violations of border-related legislation.
12:40 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
That's fair.
Notwithstanding the car thefts, I think we've established the facts, which are that this panel, which I think would have the greatest rationale for and likelihood of using this technology for investigative purposes, has provided very straightforward answers to what this is and what this isn't. I accept that.
We have all these other groups—and I'm just saying this for the purpose of the committee, not as part of the line of questioning. We have at least three or four of these meetings at two hours apiece.
12:40 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I'm going to put on the table right now and say that I'm struggling to find where the conclusion of this will be in terms of the value and the diminishing return on value of the questions.
I'll share with the committee that I am considering a way in which we might be able to digitally communicate with people and share with them a list of agreed-upon questions for response, because I'm not sure how another three days, six hours, eight hours or 10 hours of this is going to go. I know there are lots of people with live motions. I would also state that I'm at a point now in this committee where I'm hoping to steer it back onto our legislative schedule and away from whatever happens to have been in yesterday's headlines, to do the important work of the committee and to hopefully start to address the gaps in legislation.
I just don't know what's left here, so I'm actually done with the rest of my line of questioning.
I thank you all for being here. I don't think there's anything more that needs to be said in terms of the scope of your work. I appreciate you for it. I would say I look forward to seeing you back here again, but that's not always the case.
With that, I'll hand my time back over to the committee.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Mr. Green. In the two minutes that you would have had left, I'd like to explain where we are right now for the benefit of the committee.
We do have another panel that's scheduled to come in on Thursday. I don't think the notice of meeting has been published at this point, but it will be by later today. Based on the list we had in the motion, the panels will consist of at least three or four of those departments.
The clerk has gathered all of the contact information regarding the motion that was passed the other day about the privacy impact assessments. We haven't done anything with that because we just received the complete list during the meeting. That takes us up to next week, when we're expected to continue with more panels based on the motion. That takes us up to the 27th, when we're going to have the RCMP commissioner and the staff sergeant come in and speak about the SNC-Lavalin motion that was passed as well.
That's where we are right now in terms of the meetings of the committee, Mr. Green.
Go ahead, sir.
12:40 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
The one group I'm most keenly interested in hearing from is the unions. I want to hear from the representatives, because if there's no real complaint there from the representatives of the actual federal employees, it becomes very difficult for me to pursue something that may or may not be a privacy issue. I would think that those collective agreements would have stipulated most explicitly where there would be a contravention of their privacy rights.
If it could be possible, Mr. Chair, to prioritize the invitations to our union representatives to come before this committee, for me, that would determine whether this is something I would see fit to continue to pursue.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
This is a very dynamic meeting. We just received confirmation about Jennifer Carr, who was on the list, from the Professional Institute of the Public Service. She's confirmed for February 15. We may be able to advance. We've had one other confirmation from one of the unions, Mr. Green. We could adapt the meeting schedule to reflect what you said, but have the president of the Professional Institute of the Public Service, Ms. Carr.
We're still in our rounds, but I'm going to open it up for Mr. Barrett for some comments. I will open it up to Ms. Khalid or others if they have other comments as well.
Go ahead, Mr. Barrett.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
I'm generally aligned with the thought that we not just have a Groundhog Day of meetings, but I do think the question of ministerial accountability is important. These PIAs are not optional, so if we're going to set a work plan to wrap this up before six meetings and Mr. Green wants to prioritize hearing from the workers' representatives, if that box is being checked, then I would say we should prioritize hearing from the people who are accountable for not having gotten the PIAs.
We should prioritize which ministers we want to hear from. I think there was a discussion about having the procurement minister or the Treasury Board minister come before committee, so we should get those on the books. Then Mr. Kurek suggested that, if we had questions for the remaining departments, perhaps we should collect those questions from all parties, set a deadline, submit them to the departments with a deadline for response and then move on.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Okay. I appreciate those comments, Mr. Barrett.
As chair I am guided by the clerk and the analysts in following the motion that was adopted by the committee. If there is a desire to take in some of the suggestions that have been proposed during this discussion, then I will need direction from the committee on just what to do in that regard.
Ms. Khalid, Mr. Villemure has ceded to you. Go ahead, please, Ms. Khalid.
I'm just going to ask the witnesses for their patience on this, because we may resume the line of questioning. We don't have much time left.
Ms. Khalid, go ahead.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Thanks very much, Chair.
I really think the issue that's been highlighted is important. I'm quite intrigued by some of the testimony we've heard thus far. I really agree with Mr. Green that we need to hear from unions and the public service.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
I really think that, instead of ending it at this time, we should abbreviate it and see if there is something that we as a committee can recommend to ensure that privacy and privacy impact assessments have the value within our departments that they should.
At this time, I am in favour of abbreviating the study with more of a focus on unions and the public service, as Mr. Green has suggested, and going from there.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
I appreciate the comments. I will tell you that the President of the Treasury Board has been invited. We're waiting for a date for that.
What I'm hearing are two sides. There is what Mr. Green has suggested, and then there is what Mr. Barrett has suggested. Mr. Green wants to hear from those who are impacted. Mr. Barrett wants to hear from those who are in charge. Perhaps the clerk and the analysts and I can collectively find a way to get to that point over the course of the next couple of meetings. The challenge we have is that we do have the meeting ready to go on Thursday, and it will involve departments as per the motion. We can continue on with that. We may abbreviate the number of meetings down from six to maybe five at this point, because this is the second one that we've had on this.
Mr. Green, I saw your hand. Go ahead, please.
12:45 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
We can negotiate in public with the Treasury Board president and the staff who are watching to say that, if they can be available to this committee sooner rather than later, then we can wrap it up. Otherwise, we're going to be in a scenario of having all departments come before the committee. Let's hopefully get that as a bit of an incentive for the president to come before the committee.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Here's what I would like to do then.
Mr. Green, if possible, we can continue for the next few minutes with our witnesses. I'm going to suggest that we continue with the next meeting with the departments. We will have a committee business meeting, at which I can update the committee on where we are with the witnesses. We've taken about 10 or 15 minutes on this, which I think is unfair to the witnesses who presented themselves today.
I think we have clear direction from the committee on where we want to go with this. I would ask now that we continue with our witnesses. We'll go ahead with Thursday's meeting and then have a subcommittee meeting at that point. I'll make time for that if that's okay. Then I can update you on where the President of the Treasury Board is and where some of the other witnesses that were suggested here in this discussion are. Is that fair? Are we agreed? Okay.
We have Mr. Green's round completed.
I think I have Mr. Kurek next for five minutes.
Go ahead.
We're going to have very shortened rounds here. We do have a little bit of extra time because of the suspension, but we'll have five, five, two and a half, two and a half, and then we'll conclude.
Go ahead, Mr. Kurek.