Evidence of meeting #29 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 amendment.
A video is available from Parliament.
1:30 p.m.
Liberal
1:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Pat Kelly
The amendment had nothing to do with witnesses, or it didn't have to do with supplying the list of witnesses. The amendment was to add the words “for each use of such software” to the third paragraph. What that does is capture how far back the RCMP has to go with respect to warrants. We're only dealing with these types of software. We are not going back deep into history and into old—
1:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Pat Kelly
—wiretaps that are not related to this software that we're studying.
1:30 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Okay. So, it's not limiting the RCMP as to....
My apologies, Mr. Chair. I'm a little bit confused because we're not exactly sure what kind of software we're talking about initially. Are we talking about Pegasus or Pegasus-like software? I see Mr. Bezan is nodding his head about Pegasus-like software.
What we're saying is that we're not setting a timeline on where those motions are produced as long as they are linked to some software that is used by some RCMP officers with respect to some wiretapping of members of Parliament. Is that accurate?
1:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Pat Kelly
The motion uses the word “spyware” in its first sentence, and it carries on.... Sorry, that's in the letter. The motion itself, in the first paragraph, says “device investigation tools”, which I understand is a term used by the RCMP, so that would hopefully capture whatever they would consider to be a device investigation tool.
Also, in the same sentence, it refers to “technological capabilities similar to Pegasus”, so we've identified Pegasus and similar to Pegasus, device identification tools similar to Pegasus. I think that's all right there in the motion for clarity.
1:30 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Again, for further clarity, Chair, my understanding is that the Pegasus spyware was developed in 2011, and that is not the same date as Mr. Bezan had initially said, 2016. Just so everybody is clear, that's what the expectation is as to when the software was developed, and that's how far back we're going.
1:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Pat Kelly
In reading this motion, I would presume that, in order to comply with this motion, if it's passed, if the RCMP used such software at any time going back to 2011—if that is the development date of this software—then that would be captured by this motion. I think that's why using that phrase of “for each use of such software” is better than a date, so we're not guessing when these things were adopted or came into existence.
1:35 p.m.
Liberal
1:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Pat Kelly
You're welcome.
Is there any other discussion on the amendment?
Is everyone in favour of the amendment? Is anyone opposed to the amendment?
Seeing no opposition to the amendment—
1:35 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Sorry, Chair. I just wanted to canvass my members to see how they felt about it.
1:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Pat Kelly
None of them put their hand up or looked at me when I asked if anyone was opposed. I don't see any opposition to the amendment. Unless—
1:35 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Sorry. I just want to clarify one last time, Chair, that there are no dates proposed in this amendment.
1:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Pat Kelly
There's no explicit date in the amendment. We've just used the same language that's in the second paragraph into the third.
1:35 p.m.
Liberal
Yasir Naqvi Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON
No, I also want to be absolutely clear on what I'm voting on right now. Perhaps the clerk could read the precise language of the suggested amendment to the motion so that we're all clear on what we're voting on.
1:35 p.m.
The Clerk
Would you like me to read the whole motion?
1:35 p.m.
Liberal
1:35 p.m.
The Clerk
The relevant part is after the third paragraph, which begins with, “That the Committee also request, by Thursday, August 4, 2022, a list of warrants”. At the end of that paragraph, after “employee of the Parliament of Canada”, we would add “for each use of such software”.
1:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Pat Kelly
I still have not seen any objection to the amendment. Seeing none, nor a request for a recorded vote, I declare the motion amended.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We are now back to the main motion as amended.
Is there any further discussion, debate or additional amendment to the main motion?
Seeing no hands up and nobody wishing to speak, I will put the main motion to a vote.
Is there anyone opposed to, or requesting a recorded division on, the main motion?
1:35 p.m.
Liberal
1:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Pat Kelly
I would ask the clerk to record the vote on the motion.
We have a tie. I vote in favour of the motion.
(Motion as amended agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
I declare the motion carried.
The purpose of this meeting was to deal with this motion. Unless there's any urgent business that would be in order and that members would like to discuss, I'm going to declare the meeting adjourned.
Is there any other urgent related or relevant business?
Seeing none, the meeting is adjourned.