Evidence of meeting #20 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 rcmp.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:20 a.m.
Officer in Charge, National Child Exploitation Crime Centre, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
The RCMP entered into a contract with Clearview AI for the acquisition of two licences.
Currently, I do not have access to the documentation, but we can do the necessary checks and forward the documentation to you if it is available.
11:20 a.m.
Bloc
Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC
Mr. Chair, would it be possible for a written request to be sent to the RCMP to ensure that the documents requested by the committee will be filed in an unredacted manner?
Mr. Boileau, I imagine you will not mind sending us the documents unredacted, since there is not much to hide.
What do you think?
11:20 a.m.
Officer in Charge, National Child Exploitation Crime Centre, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
At this time there are two lawsuits against the RCMP. According to the legal provisions, we may not be able to provide you with all the information requested. We will certainly provide you with as much as we can.
11:20 a.m.
Bloc
Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC
I insist that the information be sent to us, because we need it to do our parliamentary work properly, especially since my question was not answered accurately and I had to insist a lot. I want you to know that we will insist.
I have another question for the RCMP officials.
Earlier, you told us that facial recognition was only used on three occasions. As with the contract, I guess we have to take your word for it.
If a situation arose that you would consider urgent, how ready would you be to deploy this type of technology again very quickly and at very short notice?
You have suggested that you would use it in urgent circumstances. Tomorrow morning, would you be prepared to deploy this technology again in an emergency?
11:20 a.m.
C/Supt Gordon Sage
At the present time, I'm unable to use that technology, which is very unfortunate, because there are victims at risk in Canada under the child exploitation side of the house. I cannot attempt to identify them, because I don't have the technology.
You talk about an urgent file; that is the most urgent file, in my eyes. There are victims in Canada who are being exploited by people—
11:20 a.m.
C/Supt Gordon Sage
—and I could not use that.
11:20 a.m.
Bloc
Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC
Please, Mr. Sage, I have more questions to ask.
I understand what you are telling me, but why were you once able to deploy it urgently when you are no longer able to do so today?
What has changed between the first, second and third use and the present time, May 2022?
11:20 a.m.
C/Supt Gordon Sage
The problem is that it's not available to us. We have been directed not to use it under any circumstances, so it's not available for us to use.
11:20 a.m.
Bloc
Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC
If I understand correctly, you are waiting for a legal framework.
You have used facial recognition technology before, without a legal framework, and I guess you decided to wait for us to legislate on it. Is that what you are waiting for to use it again?
11:20 a.m.
C/Supt Gordon Sage
I'm waiting on a decision from our national technical operations, our NTOP process, to do that assessment. Once I have that assessment from there and I'm told that I can use it, I will continue to look for victims of child exploitation. Until I get that process completed from my NTOP people, I cannot use it, and victims are at risk today.
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
11:20 a.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Thank you very much.
My first question is to Mr. Sage.
Sir, do you report to Mr. Paul Boudreau or does Mr. Paul Boudreau report directly to you?
11:20 a.m.
C/Supt Gordon Sage
I report to Mr. Paul Boudreau.
11:20 a.m.
NDP
11:20 a.m.
C/Supt Gordon Sage
I cannot provide that answer. I do not know—
11:20 a.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
On the question of the licences, the previous questioner had a great line on contracts. Who, ultimately, would have signed the contract? You don't have to give the contents.
Who, ultimately, would have signed off on that contract? Would that have been yourself as the director general?
11:20 a.m.
C/Supt Gordon Sage
No, I believe it was obtained by an investigator within the NCECC.
11:20 a.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
A ground-level investigator would have purchased this technology. It wouldn't have gone through any procurement channels or required a higher level of scrutiny.
11:20 a.m.
C/Supt Gordon Sage
No. Unfortunately, the director general at that time—it was not me—was not aware of the purchase when it was made.
11:20 a.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
With other officers, when they access CPIC, and this was a point of contention I had with your superior.... When they surreptitiously access CPIC to gather information that has not been lawfully granted.... There is a code of conduct within the RCMP. Was the investigating officer who pursued this technology ever investigated for a violation of the code of conduct?
11:25 a.m.
C/Supt Gordon Sage
No, he wasn't.
11:25 a.m.
C/Supt Gordon Sage
I'm trying to understand your question. If you're asking me if a person should be investigated for saving victims of child exploitation, I believe that would be inappropriate—
