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.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
I find that concerning, because we're dealing with privacy issues. You say that it'll take a bit more time. Could you give us an approximate amount of time?
I ask that because initially they said that they were supposed to put the recommendations in place 12 months after the report. They have not done that. We know that it's systemic and widespread. What duration of time do you think it will take?
11:45 a.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
The RCMP has set up a system. It's the implementation of the details of the system—for instance, the training to be given to officers—that is taking more time to define than we had hoped.
I would suggest that you ask the RCMP how long it's going to take. We have asked them ourselves, obviously. I can report on what the RCMP has told us. I can undertake to do that, so I will do that.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Thank you so much. Would you be able to submit that to the committee? Is it possible?
11:45 a.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Yes.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Okay. Thank you so much.
I'm not sure how much time I have, Chair.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
In a joint investigation of Clearview....
I don't know how much time I have now.
11:45 a.m.
A voice
None.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Pat Kelly
We have time today. I'm being a little generous, so go ahead with your question. After a brief question and a brief answer, we'll move on.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Thank you so much, Chair.
In the joint investigation of Clearview by the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, the Information and Privacy Commissioner for British Columbia and the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta, the offices recommended the following: One, cease offering the facial recognition services that have been the subject of this investigation to clients in Canada; two, cease the collection, use and disclosure of images and biometric facial arrays collected from individuals in Canada; and three, delete images and biometric facial arrays collected from individuals in Canada in its possession.
Has Clearview taken any of these actions?
11:45 a.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Clearview stopped offering its services in Canada in 2020, I believe, while we were still investigating, but it is in court challenging the decisions of my colleagues, I believe because they do not want to give an undertaking in perpetuity that they will not offer their services. At this point, they are not offering their services in Canada.
May 2nd, 2022 / 11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and through you to Mr. Therrien as well.
As you mentioned, last week we had the RCMP before us. In response to the findings that the RCMP's use of Clearview AI was illegal, they said they disagreed with your findings. A representative reiterated that stance.
Does the reason for disagreeing with your findings have any merit, and why or why not?
11:45 a.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
I'll give a lawyerly answer, which I think will be clear.
The provision at play is the provision of the Privacy Act that governs the collection of information, in this case by the RCMP. What the RCMP is saying is that this section, section 4 of the Privacy Act, does not explicitly require a federal institution such as the RCMP to ensure the legality of the practices of its commercial partner before the public sector uses the information.
It is true that section 4 does not explicitly require that of a federal institution; we think that the requirement exists implicitly. Essentially, imagine that federal institutions would be able to contract out and be able, through contracting with the private sector, to engage in practices that it cannot engage in directly. That is unacceptable. We think the law does not allow for that.
That said, is it credible or is it reasonable? There is some credible basis for the RCMP's position. To the extent that there is ambiguity in the law, I would encourage you strongly to close that loophole and to require government institutions—not only the RCMP, but all government institutions—to ensure that what they're buying is lawful when they rely on the private sector.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON
Thank you.
As a follow-up question, should the powers of your office be strengthened so that the rulings on Privacy Act violations are binding and properly enforced, since they seem to have ignored them?
11:50 a.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
The short answer is yes. We've recommended that many times. Yes.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON
Okay.
With regard to just a little bit more data on its use by the RCMP, are you aware of how many convictions they made using evidence collected by Clearview AI?
11:50 a.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
No, I am not. We asked how many times they'd used it, and I believe it was in the tens of cases. As to the convictions, no, I do not know the number.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON
In your opinion, just knowing how they collected it, could their collection and use of Clearview AI's facial recognition technology risk overturning convictions of any criminal caught or prosecuted using data collected by Clearview?
11:50 a.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
I think that's speculative. The RCMP says, which I have no reason to doubt, that when they use the technology, there's human review. That tells me that there's a police officer who then undertakes an investigation and presents evidence through a Crown attorney under the normal rules. That's my assumption, but I don't know that.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON
The RCMP told this committee last Thursday that Clearview AI was the only modern FRT system they were using, but when asked could not detail other non-modern FRT systems. Through your investigation, are you aware of other FRT systems that the RCMP is using?