Information & Ethics Committee on Feb. 8th, 2024

[Steven Harroun]

Absolutely, I'll undertake that.

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

Thank you very much.

I have the same question for Mr. Ferron, and the same request for suggestions.

[Eric Ferron]

I don't have any suggestions right now. We follow the rules as written. As I said at the outset, many of them are in the Criminal Code. We stick to these rules to ensure that when we use the tool…

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

I apologize for interrupting, but I don't have much time.

To strengthen people's trust in the Canada Revenue Agency, do you have any suggestions as to what we, the legislators, might be able to do to help you?

[Eric Ferron]

I don't have anything specific for you at the moment.

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

Okay.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Villemure.

Ms. Idlout, you have six minutes. Go ahead, please.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Qujannamiik and welcome.

I have, very quickly, some questions for the Canada Revenue Agency related to the article that was originally published by Radio-Canada in November 2023. I'm sure you know what I'm talking about. In that article it was mentioned that the CRA was using tools, and it was using these tools to analyze data related to tax offences.

First, can you explain in more detail how the use of such tools by your institution can be justified under a federal law, if any?

[Eric Ferron]

The criminal investigations program is responsible for investigating significant cases of tax evasion. That requires us to gather evidence, and our investigators will use the tools that they have at their disposal to gather this evidence. This can include interviews of suspects and of witnesses, but it can also include the use of judicial authorizations. This can be used for production orders or search warrants.

When we do search warrants, we can come across some electronic devices. We'll need to extract the data from these devices, these computers or cellphones, and it's with these tools we're talking about here today that we can do so. It allows us to get access in a very surgical way and not go through the whole phone by ourselves. The tools allow us to find what we're looking for. This will be used as evidence, ultimately, that we would present to the courts.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

If the authority for the use of these tools is not coming from law, where is the source coming from for you to use them?

[Eric Ferron]

The authority we have is in the Criminal Code. That is what allows us to use the tool, to seize these electronic devices in order to use the tools to extract the data.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

I have questions for both of you, both agencies, because when you were responding to one of the Conservative's questions regarding surveillance, both of you responded to say that you don't generally surveil people, but both of you mentioned that you use digital forensic tools.

Can each of you provide more details about what that actually means? Qujannamiik.

[Eric Ferron]

For the criminal investigations program at the CRA, the difference is that, when we have a judicial authorization that allows us to do a search, and if we come across an electronic device and we seize this device, we would then be able to extract the data from it. We have to have the tool connected to the electronic device—a phone or a computer—so the process is very limited that way. In other words, we can't be surveilling the Canadian population as a whole. These tools are made to be used with the actual phone, the actual computer or the electronic device that we have seized as part of a search.

[Steven Harroun]

I'll explain. There are several provisions under CASL, the anti-spam legislation that we have. Some of those provisions relate to the CRTC's ability to investigate the installation of software without consent, which includes viruses, malware, botnets and those types of activities—the more nefarious activities, if you will. When we're involved in an investigation related to those types of activities, we are often required to seek a search warrant to go collect devices to use this digital forensic tool to....

It comes down to the basics of evidence: We identify, analyze and preserve the evidence, and that's how we use this tool, in those very limited circumstances, on those very specific CASL cases.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Qujannamiik.

Because I'm not very familiar with this file, I don't know if there are any reporting requirements of incidences when you've had to use digital forensic tools. Is there data that's collected annually to show how many times each of your agencies has had to use them, and do you report that to Parliament?

[Steven Harroun]

For the CRTC, we do not have a reporting requirement. Because our scope and our use is so limited, as I said, it's less than a handful of times in 10 years. It is very specific.

[Eric Ferron]

We don't have any reporting requirements on the use of the tools. We do report various statistical data when it comes to criminal investigations, but not in terms of specific use of that tool.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Ms. Idlout.

That concludes our first round of questioning.

We're going to our second round of five, five, two and a half, and two and a half.

We start with Mr. Kurek. Go ahead for five minutes.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to our witnesses.

This is just an observation. It's interesting. You talked about the PIA, but in the context of the report that triggered this committee to go about this study, I would encourage the idea of “transparency by default” to make sure that it is clear. You're talking about a PIA being done, and certainly an early explanation about that process would have been helpful. I'm sure that the reporters who did the investigation would have valued that information as well.

Just as another observation, both of your departments acquired this technology under a previous government and did the PIA, so certainly there seems to be a deep care for a former president of the Treasury Board's commitment to ensuring that privacy was respected.

To the CRA, I'd like to get some numbers, if I could. How often is this technology to extract data from cellphones used on a yearly basis within your investigations? It's to the CRA in general, but specific to investigations.

[Eric Ferron]

I'm sorry, but I don't have the specific information you're looking for. We don't have the specific number of times we've used the tool to extract data from computers or cellphones we would have seized. It's something we can look into and provide that information.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

If you can provide that to the committee, I think it would be helpful. Are we talking about dozens, hundreds or thousands of times? There's a massive range of what could be possible, so if you could please provide that in writing to the committee—so that we could make it public—that would be appreciated. Can I ask for that information?

[Eric Ferron]

Yes, we'll do our best to gather that information.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Just so that we're clear, we work on deadlines here, so by next Wednesday, if possible....

[Eric Ferron]

We'll do our best. We've had this tool for several years now. I don't know how far back we can go in terms of providing fulsome numbers, but we'll do our best.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you.

Go ahead.