Thank you, Mr. Chair.
To follow up on the quality of the answers we've been getting, they seem to be intentionally evasive from some of the witnesses. I remind witnesses that at committee, you can be held in contempt of Parliament if you aren't fully co-operating or are it is found that you haven't been fully co-operating. I'll take your counsel on this, Mr. Chair, that we'll allow the witnesses' testimony to stand.
Based on some of the conversations we've had in the past, potentially we need to have a more senior member of the RCMP here, such as Commissioner Lucki herself. That is something we should consider.
I also want to reiterate that the documents that have been requested by committee members should be provided by June 1 so that we can take them into consideration in doing our work on this study.
I want to go back to IntelCenter Check.
The witnesses were saying they haven't heard about it before, yet IntelCenter advertises this product as terrorist facial recognition technology software, using open-source images of terrorists from the Internet and the RCMP in its procurement documents. That suggests that not only is the RCMP using it, but possibly CSIS and possibly the Department of National Defence.
As has been said before, we can't do indirectly what we're prohibited from doing directly under charter rights in surveilling Canadians. To the RCMP, are you using any FRT technology other than Clearview, which is right now not available in Canada? Again, there is the issue around the IntelCenter database FRT.