On the amendment, I would agree with Mr. Villemure's assessment on some of the language that needs to be couched.
I'm looking at the amendment right now. Perhaps Mr. Fergus would consider importing Mr. Villemure's words of recommendation. The ultimate goal of what Mr. Villemure is proposing is that this committee be able to be satisfied that the privacy data of 33 million Canadians, which was collected without their knowledge, is protected, and that the proper security protocols and security measures are put in place. That's really the crux of what we're trying to accomplish here in this study.
As I mentioned in previous meetings, this wasn't known until this RFP, which would have expanded this program, was actually instituted or called for. Since then, since this RFP was put out, security experts, surveillance experts and privacy experts have universally been exposing cause for concern, so I won't be satisfied until I'm absolutely 100% certain that this information was disaggregated and depersonalized.
I'm sorry for being a skeptic, Mr. Chair, but I'm not going to take the government's word for it. I'm not going to take the Minister of Health's word for it. We proposed this study so that we could call in the companies that were collecting this data and so that we could call in the security and surveillance experts.
Over the course of the last couple of weeks, I have done a deep dive into this, and there are legitimate reasons to be concerned from a security standpoint, so I think that what Mr. Villemure proposes is a prudent move on the part of the committee.
I know there has been some mention of what Mr. van Koeverden sent out. I find it awfully curious that 45 minutes before this committee meeting started, we got a letter from the parliamentary secretary, saying everything was okay with our using this data.
I agree with Mr. Villemure and I think my colleagues on this side agree as well that we want the best results from a public health standpoint, but we also need to be bloody well assured that the privacy rights of Canadians are being protected. Until and unless we get to the point where we're satisfied, it is of concern to many Canadians, at least judging from the reactions I have received over the last couple of weeks, that their mobility data was being collected without their knowledge.
I will also note that in this BlueDot reference.... I've had to borrow Mr. Kurek's iPad here because I really needed to blow it up a bit more so I could see what these data sources are. For anybody who reads the appendix to this, it should actually not give them any satisfaction that their privacy and data were protected. It should give reasons for concern.
I want to be able to discuss with these privacy and security experts what the risk is to the privacy data of Canadians. I think it's prudent for us to send a message to the government that this RFP needs to be delayed.
Mr. Fergus is reaching the spirit of what Mr. Villemure is proposing, but we cannot have this privacy data collected until we are absolutely sure—and most important, until Canadians can be assured—that this privacy data is being protected in the proper way, with the proper security protocols and the proper security measures.
Just on the amendment, I think we are getting close to where we need to be on this, but we had better be sure.