Information & Ethics Committee on Feb. 15th, 2024

[Evan Light]

Yes.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

That's their own testimony, in fact, by their marketing materials.

[Evan Light]

Yes.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

That is a problem. That is a problem for me, because I do rely on the testimony of people who are here, but I also wouldn't expect them to know all the ways in which the technology they procure could potentially impact their workers or the general public. I reference all the ways in which data breaches happen in high-tech companies, and in fact government, where very sensitive information is shared very widely through malicious attacks.

In your opinion, based on your subject matter expertise, do you have any concerns around the possibility for this technology to be used in ways that might lead to broader breaches in the privacy of individuals?

[Evan Light]

Absolutely. I think that talking about its use within or by federal government agencies is really the tip of the iceberg. Nobody, including myself.... I haven't had a chance, to date, to look at this technology among police forces throughout Canada and at every level of government, and there is a high level of possibility of abuse.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

One of the challenges we have—I would state this as my own opinion—is in terms of the lack of trust and the cynicism in government, and indeed, in some spaces that creeps over into conspiracies. As somebody who is also an open government advocate, would you agree with the notion that greater transparency, greater openness, provides less room for conspiracy or cynicism? In other words, do open governments lead to greater trust in government institutions?

[Evan Light]

Absolutely.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

When you're trying to track procurement—I was also on a file that dealt with government procurement, and I also found it very challenging—can you speak to some of the ways in which you have found it difficult to actually follow what the government is doing? For instance, in previous testimony, you may recall that I asked the procurement director, essentially, of the department what the line item was on the technology, and he couldn't reference it. I also wanted to know what the line items for procurement were related to on-device technology, a.k.a. spyware.

Can you talk about the ways in which it's very difficult, even for somebody with your expertise and your research background, to actually follow the bouncing ball when it comes to tracking exactly what the government is doing, where it's spending money and what it's spending money on?

[Evan Light]

Sure. Luckily, I have a research assistant who used to work for the private sector and wrote contracts with the government, so she understands procurement in a way that I do not.

When we do this research, we essentially have a huge list of companies that we know produce really nothing but surveillance tools, and we dig through the open Canada database of government contracts above $10,000. This only gives us access to one or two contracts above $10,000. Anything less than that isn't reported and isn't available to query. Even then, the description of what the contracts are for is very generic. It's hard to actually parse through and see what is being used, unless we find it on ATIP.

To date, over the last three years, we've filed hundreds of ATIPs. Our response rate has been about 37%, so we have hundreds of outstanding ATIPs for hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of contracts.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Would that not be solved by proactive disclosure of this stuff, a database that you could just go to and see, rather than having to be forced to search for it through ATIPs?

[Evan Light]

Absolutely. I've seen it done elsewhere. For instance, in Uruguay in the 2010s, they were developing really interesting open government technologies where you could see the spending in every ministry and department in real time, and you could track what was happening.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

That's all. Thank you so much.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Green and Mr. Light.

That concludes our six-minute round. We are going to go to our five-minute round and start with Mr. Brock.

Go ahead, Mr. Brock.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Good morning, Professor.

I want to focus not on the device itself and the software attached to it—which is the focus of this committee hearing—but rather on the broader issue of privacy. You spoke in general terms about this being a fundamental human right. It has been a fundamental right in Canada since 1977.

I'd like to get your expert opinion, sir, on the disastrous ArriveCAN app, which has just been revealed to be an abuse of taxpayer dollars of over $60 million.

Think back, if you can, to the time when the ArriveCAN app was heavily promoted by this government. It was the way to go in terms of dealing with COVID and trying to protect Canadians, etc. There's a portion in the preamble when you sign up for the ArriveCAN app that I'd like your opinion on. The title is “How your information is used and disclosed”. It says:

Personal information may be disclosed to contractors working for the Public Health Agency of Canada and Service Canada as well as to the following entities: other government institutions, as well as provincial, territorial, municipal governments or international health organizations as well as their institutions for these purposes.

Personal information may also be used for program evaluation. In other limited and specific circumstances, personal information may be used and/or disclosed without consent in accordance with section 7 and subsection 8(2) of the Privacy Act.

It looks like tens of millions of Canadians who were forced by the Trudeau government to sign up for the ArriveCAN app had their personal information wildly—

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

I have a point of order, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Hold on, Mr. Brock. There is a point of order.

Go ahead, Ms. Khalid.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thanks, Chair.

I'm just questioning the relevance of Mr. Brock's questioning. I'm sure the witness was not called for the line of questioning that Mr. Brock has delved down.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Just hang on a second. In every circumstance where a point of order is made, I am consistent in my ruling. I did it with Mr. Housefather, and I'm doing it again with Mr. Brock.

It's his time. We have a subject matter expert on privacy who is before us here. I am going to allow Mr. Brock to continue. He has the floor, and I'm sure he's going to bring this to where it needs to go.

Mr. Brock.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Just to clarify—

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Ms. Khalid, we can beat a dead horse on this. I've been chair of this committee now for almost a year and a half, and my rulings have been consistent in every circumstance for every member who sits around this table.

Mr. Brock, you have three minutes and two seconds. Go ahead.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

You heard the exchange. Some Liberal members don't care about privacy. Conservatives certainly do.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

I object to that.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Mr. Brock, it's a matter of opinion.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Chair, I wasn't going to say it, but I will say it now. Mr. Brock started his questioning by saying that he's going to be asking questions that are not relevant to the topic at hand today.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

I'm not sure I heard him say that, but I can certainly check back.

Mr. Brock, you have the floor for two minutes and 50 seconds.