Evidence of meeting #18 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 technology.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Daniel Therrien  Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Patricia Kosseim  Commissioner, Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario
Diane Poitras  President, Commission d'accès à l'information du Québec
Vance Lockton  Senior Technology and Policy Advisor, Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC

Thank you.

Mr. Therrien, a little earlier, you mentioned the efforts made by the European Commission. Did these include private corporations or only government organizations?

You're indicating both. Okay.

Can your guidance document provide useful ideas for private corporations as well?

12:35 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Daniel Therrien

[Inaudible—Editor] and adapted to the context.

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC

Yes, of course.

At the moment, do you know of any entities that are neither commercial nor governmental, but possibly criminal, that use facial recognition?

12:35 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Daniel Therrien

We don't have any intelligence on that.

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC

Okay. Thank you very much.

Ms. Poitras, I'd like to ask you the same question.

Do you know of any entities that are neither commercial nor governmental, and possibly criminal, that use facial recognition?

12:35 p.m.

President, Commission d'accès à l'information du Québec

Diane Poitras

I don't have any information on that.

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC

Thank you very much.

Mr. Therrien, would you go so far as to say that we could learn from the current work being done by the European Commission on facial recognition?

Of course, the context would have to be taken into consideration, but is their work in the forefront at the moment?

12:35 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Daniel Therrien

The purpose of the legislation is to protect constitutional rights and human rights. So from that standpoint, the answer is yes, definitely. As to whether it's the best model, I'm not sure whether my colleagues would all agree with me, but I would say that it's a very good model.

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC

What do you think about this, Ms. Kosseim?

12:35 p.m.

Commissioner, Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario

Patricia Kosseim

Excuse me, but I didn't understand which model you were talking about.

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC

I'm talking about the European Commission's work.

Do you think we can learn from it, or use it as a model for our work?

12:35 p.m.

Commissioner, Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario

Patricia Kosseim

Absolutely. It's a good model and we can certainly learn from it.

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC

Thank you very much.

What do you think about it, Ms. Poitras?

12:35 p.m.

President, Commission d'accès à l'information du Québec

Diane Poitras

It's unanimous. We can certainly learn a lot from it and adapt it as required.

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC

The General Data Protection Regulation, the GDPR, was also a good model for the protection of privacy.

Mr. Therrien, in the time I have remaining, do you have any final comments to make?

12:35 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Daniel Therrien

Facial recognition is a technology which, when used improperly, can very seriously violate basic rights. I've heard questions about the desirability of a flexible principles-based act. It's generally true, but in view of the consequences of facial recognition, I would strongly encourage you to go beyond principles and to provide specific provisions.

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC

Thank you very much.

12:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Pat Kelly

Thank you.

For the final round of questions, we go to Mr. Green for two and a half minutes or so.

12:35 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

Thank you.

I go back to this notion of private sector use of AI and third party use of AI with law enforcement. There have even been allegations of political use in some cases.

My question, through you to the Information Commissioner, is this: Has there been, within your mandate, the ability to explore or study the use of private sector AI for nefarious things like citizen surveillance, phone hacking and this sort of thing?

May 2nd, 2022 / 12:40 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Daniel Therrien

Nefarious by...?

12:40 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

Well, I'll give you an example.

There was a lawsuit about NSO's Pegasus. It was used to hack into phones of people who were critical of the State of Israel. We've seen that technology used in different ways. We know that Clearview is one particular thing, but there's certainly Cambridge Analytica and others. What has your office done to provide some kind of understanding about the nefarious use of artificial intelligence as it relates to threats to national security?

12:40 p.m.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Daniel Therrien

I would go back to my general point. Yes, we have investigated the link between Facebook and Cambridge Analytica. We have studied the use by Cambridge Analytica of data, in some cases to try to influence political processes. There can be also other nefarious uses.

I think it's high time to stop looking at privacy as a technological issue for the very few and to look at the use of technology particularly when it collects personal information for the link of these technologies with fundamental rights, and to legislate accordingly.

12:40 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

Mr. Chair, in wrapping up, I look forward to the opportunity to perhaps expand on that and referencing elections that are coming up with regard to allegations that have gone on through various troll farms and different types of social interventions that have happened.

I don't know that we'll have the time to deal with it this time around—

12:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Pat Kelly

You have a bit of time. Ask another question.

12:40 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

Okay.

Do we have the ability within existing legislation to adequately account for that private sector influence politically within our social context?