Evidence of meeting #144 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 investigation.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Philippe Dufresne  Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada

The Chair Conservative John Brassard

Good afternoon, everyone.

I call the meeting to order.

Welcome to the 144th meeting of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(h) and the motion adopted by the committee on Thursday, November 21, 2024, the committee will begin its study of the liquidation of TikTok Technology Canada Inc.

I'd like to welcome our witnesses for the first hour today.

From the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, we have Privacy Commissioner Philippe Dufresne.

Welcome back, Mr. Dufresne. I hope you went home and were able to come back. We had you here on Thursday.

Also from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, we have Marc Chénier, deputy commissioner and senior general counsel.

Just before we begin with opening comments, we do have a study budget for this. I'd like to get this adopted now. It's $1,750 for this study.

Is there any objection to the study budget from members of the committee?

No...?

Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON

I'm sorry, Chair. Can you outline what exactly that money was spent on?

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative John Brassard

Yes.

Three headsets cost $250 each. Two working meals cost $500 each, totalling $1,000. That's $1,750.

Is that okay? Is there any objection?

I don't see Mr. Green, and I'd like to see him. I don't have any indication from him on whether or not he objects to this.

I'll come back to Mr. Green. I won't adopt this now. I know that I have the consent of the rest of the members. Once he's on, we'll figure that out.

Mr. Dufresne, you may begin your opening statement.

Philippe Dufresne Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

Thank you for inviting me to appear as part of your study on the government's decision to order the wind‑up of TikTok Technology Canada Inc.

I'm pleased to be able to contribute to this important discussion on national security and privacy with respect to foreign influence on digital platforms, including social media, and foreign ownership or control in that context.

With respect to the government's decision to order the windup of the Canadian business carried on by TikTok Technology Canada, Inc., this decision was made pursuant to the Investment Canada Act, which allows for the review of foreign investments that may be injurious to Canada’s national security.

According to the guidelines on the national security review of investments, these reviews may look at a number of factors, including whether a foreign investment could facilitate access to sensitive personal data, including personally identifiable health or genetic information; biometric information; financial information; private communications; geolocation; or personal data concerning government officials.

This assessment is made by the government. My office was not involved or consulted with respect to this assessment. Indeed, we learned of it when it was announced publicly on November 6, 2024.

As you know, in February 2023, I launched an investigation into the TikTok social media platform with my counterparts from Quebec, British Columbia and Alberta.

We will determine whether TikTok's practices comply with Canadian privacy laws and, more specifically, whether TikTok has obtained informed consent for the collection, use and disclosure of personal information.

Given the importance of protecting children's privacy, the joint investigation focuses on TikTok's privacy practices for young users.

I expect that the findings from our investigation into TikTok will be informative not just for that company but also for other organizations that collect and handle children’s sensitive personal information. The government’s decision to order the windup of TikTok Technology Canada, Inc., does not impact my authority to investigate. We are nearing the end of this investigation. My goal is to have it concluded in the next few months. As the investigation is ongoing, I am limited as to what else I can share at this time.

Championing children's privacy, addressing and advocating for privacy in this time of technological change, and maximizing our impact are my three strategic priorities for the Office of the Privacy Commissioner. To this end, in October of this year I issued a statement with my G7 counterparts on artificial intelligence and children. The statement highlights the importance of ensuring that such technologies as AI be developed in a manner consistent with the best interest of the child.

To achieve this important balance between innovation and the fundamental right to privacy, territories must work together so that citizens can actively participate in the digital world knowing that their fundamental right to privacy is protected.

To achieve this, we are setting parameters that will help organizations innovate while fostering a culture where privacy principles by design and default are embedded in their core business.

In closing, I would like to thank and congratulate the committee for its most recent report, released last Thursday, entitled “Oversight of Social Media Platforms: Ensuring Privacy and Safety Online.”

I fully support your recommendations that are good for privacy, for Canadians, for the public interest and for innovation. I look forward to sharing and discussing these important insights with my counterparts in Canada and internationally.

Thank you again. I'd be happy to answer your questions.

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative John Brassard

Thank you, Mr. Dufresne.

Before we commence with Mr. Barrett, I have Mr. Green online.

Mr. Green, we went through a study budget here of up to $1,750. It doesn't mean we're going to spend it all. Whatever we don't spend gets put back to the House. That's for working meals and headsets. We may or may not need them all.

Are you okay with that?

I have the consent of the committee, Madam Clerk, so the study budget is approved.

Mr. Barrett, you have six minutes. Go ahead.

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

Mr. Dufresne, what are the potential risks to the privacy and data of Canadians who continue to use TikTok?

4:30 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada

Philippe Dufresne

We are investigating the transparency of the consent practices of TikTok. The investigation is under way, so I can't speak about the substance of that investigation. When we announced it, we did indicate that it would have a specific focus on children's privacy and younger users.

We are working hard, with our colleagues from Quebec, British Columbia and Alberta, to complete this as soon as possible. I hope to do so, as I said, in the next few months.

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

I think that there's a bit of a problem for Canadians who are trying to make an informed decision for themselves, for parents who are trying to parent their children and for children who are trying to make informed decisions for themselves.

We have a government that has said that this app is okay to continue to use. However, the offices of this business that operates this platform must be closed. There are specific risks, but the government can't tell us what they are. It's a complete absence of transparency.

You're an independent officer of Parliament, so you serve a function that's important to help keep Canadians informed and to help be a check against some of what government does.

Should the government have been more transparent with Canadians on a matter that deals with the protection of Canadians' privacy?

Should the government have aligned its decision and announcements with the release of your report?

4:35 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada

Philippe Dufresne

The government's decision, which was announced on November 6 by the Minister of Innovation, indicates that this was made under the Investment Canada Act. It's made for national security reasons.

Our investigation is a different track. Our investigation is looking at the privacy of Canadians, and children in particular. We're moving that forward, but the national security component is a separate aspect. I can't speak to that decision and to the reasons behind it. I wasn't part of it. I wasn't consulted on it.

What I can say is that we—me and my colleagues from the provinces and territory—have issued a statement on the privacy of children. We make a number of points in there setting out our expectations for organizations, giving tips, highlighting certain things for parents and children, making sure that the privacy protections are highest, and calling out organizations when their practices aren't clear enough. We're going to continue to use the tools that we have, which are the promotion and the investigation power. We look forward to completing that.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

I'm interested in your investigatory powers.

The government has ordered the closure of the TikTok offices in Canada.

Whom are you going to investigate in the future, if there's an issue raised with respect to TikTok, if they have no presence in Canada and if they terminate...as has been the ordered by the government, for very opaque reasons?

We have no metric or measure to be able to judge whether those are good reasons or not, but they've ordered the closure of these offices.

Whom would you investigate and you ask documents from?

Would you ask foreign entities? Would those foreign entities have any obligation whatsoever to participate or co-operate with your investigations?

4:35 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada

Philippe Dufresne

Canadian law will apply to a matter if it impacts Canadian users. For privacy law in Canada to apply, it's not necessary for an organization to have offices in Canada, or for it to have generated in Canada. The courts have recognized that if there's a real and substantial connection to Canada, and if Canadian users can be impacted by this, we have jurisdiction.

As to how we investigate those things, if the organization doesn't have anyone in Canada, we would reach out to the organization in another country.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

You reach out to them in another country, and they say, “Contact our Canadian office.”

Then what do you do?

4:35 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada

Philippe Dufresne

We reach out to the organization in the other country.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

Yes.

4:35 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada

Philippe Dufresne

If it doesn't have a Canadian office, we speak to them outside Canada.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

I understand that, sir.

However, with all due respect, what jurisdiction does an officer of the Parliament of Canada have in China?

4:35 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada

Philippe Dufresne

We don't have any enforcement powers in other countries. We don't have the ability to force an organization to collaborate with us or provide us with information if they're outside Canada.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

It seems a bit problematic, then. You might see what I'm driving at here. If we have no entity in this country for you to collaborate with, it creates a problem.

4:35 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada

Philippe Dufresne

It does, certainly, in terms of compelling powers—

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

Right.

4:35 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada

Philippe Dufresne

—if there's a refusal to provide us with documentation. It's easier if the organization is in Canada.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

Yes, I expect it would be easier.

It just seems odd that the government would say, “This is so dangerous that we have to close the office, but it's okay for children to continue using the app.” I guess what I'm driving at here is that they need to pick a lane. Either it's safe for Canadians or it's not. We just don't know.

Isn't that a problem?

4:35 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada

Philippe Dufresne

Well, I'm focused on the investigation we're pursuing. We're interacting on this with TikTok. We're asking the questions. We're going to be publishing our report, as I said, as soon as we can. That will contain our conclusions with regard to their compliance with Canadian privacy law.

4:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative John Brassard

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Dufresne and Mr. Barrett.

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

Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON

Thank you very much, Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses who are appearing today.

Thank you, Commissioner.

I'll start by asking this: Is it your understanding that the government's decision under the Investment Canada Act review relates entirely to TikTok's business operations, not the app itself?