Information & Ethics Committee on Aug. 8th, 2022

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

That's entirely possible.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you very much.

You talked about openness, transparency and accountability. We agree that these are good things. All of these things are done to gain the public's trust. We agree with that.

The government has made a commitment to transparency and national security, while emphasizing that it will be transparent, but that it will not always be able to provide details. We understand that.

Based on what you said earlier in your opening remarks, efforts are being made to ensure transparency.

Pardon me for saying this, but we have to take your word for it. I'm wondering if having to take your word creates trust.

What do you think?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I agree that if we want to maintain people's trust, we need to be open and transparent. That is why the work of this committee is essential.

It is also essential that the RCMP and the commissioner work together to protect privacy rights. That's why we must continue to work with the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency and the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians. It's only through transparency—

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

I'm sorry for interrupting you, but my time is limited.

My colleagues mentioned facial recognition and data geolocation. It seems to me that the culture of the RCMP is one of avoidance rather than privacy.

What do you think?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I hope and believe that the RCMP understands and abides by the commitment to be transparent and to always work collaboratively with all the institutions that are there to protect the charter rights of Canadians.

The RCMP will continue to work in good faith with all parliamentarians, and it will continue to work hard. It will continue to work with this committee to ensure that the value of transparency is respected and to help build trust.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Would you be prepared to ban Pegasus in Canada?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Yes.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pat Kelly]

We'll go to Mr. Green for two and a half minutes.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you very much.

From some disclosures that we had in preparation for this committee, we noted that there were 32 instances of this technology deployed dating back to the year 2017. In your briefing notes, was it ever disclosed to you that there were instances that were before the date of 2017?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Mr. Green, I've been advised that the earliest year in which this technique was used was 2017.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

In the testimony of the Privacy Commissioner, when we were referencing the use of stingray technology, which sets up phantom cell towers to intercept cellphone information, it was noted that there were instances where the use had happened without a warrant.

Are you aware of any instances when this might have been used? I think it was exigent circumstances or something to that effect. Are you aware of any instances where that would have happened?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I think the precise test would be whether or not there were exigent or emergency circumstances, but it is my knowledge that these have all been subject to prior judicial authorization. I would invite you to put the question directly to the RCMP as well.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

When I asked this question, respectfully, I felt like you kind of danced around it. Again, one of the ways in which I think this committee would avoid much of the work we've already done is if we had a system in place that allowed for privacy impact assessments to happen as a legal requirement through the Privacy Commissioner. I'm going to ask you once again: Is that something you would support, given the work of this committee and the testimony that you've already given on the importance of privacy as a fundamental right?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Mr. Green, I guess what I'm getting at in my answer is that I look forward to receiving that recommendation. I think—

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

That's the same answer.

I'm going to ask this next question in a direct way. When the privacy impact assessment is provided to the Privacy Commissioner, would you be willing to turn that over to this committee, given the foundation of the duty of candour and the power of this committee to send for documents and evidence?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Yes. I mean, I think I want to be as transparent as I can be about those privacy impacts. I also want to make sure that we're respecting the process that is being undertaken by the Privacy Commissioner in conjunction with the RCMP. The bottom line for me is that I think the more transparent we can be, the better.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pat Kelly]

Thank you.

With that, we will go to Mr. Kurek for five minutes, followed by Mr. Bains for five minutes. That should conclude this panel.

Go ahead, Mr. Kurek.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Minister, for coming here today.

You avoided answering the question before, so I'll maybe direct it to you in a little bit of a different way. Are you aware of any other instances of agencies or departments under your purview that have utilized this technology—yes or no?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Again, I would say to you that—

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Other than the RCMP, Minister, are you aware of any entities under your purview—I'm not even asking you to identify those departments—that have used this technology? That's other than the RCMP.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I was coming to the answer. I was just in the process of saying that these techniques, if and when they are used, are always done in a manner that is consistent with the law and the charter.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

We'll take that as a “yes”, although with some equivocating on how you came about it.

Minister, as has been the case, and certainly as I've seen a number of times before this committee, the government's response seems to be that we need to build trust, so just trust us. In many cases, including the contradictory testimony you've given here today with what the Privacy Commissioner spoke about this morning...and seeing how the OPQ signed off on by, I believe, your parliamentary secretary at the time, Ms. Damoff, and the letter that was provided to this committee, there's a difference. There's a discrepancy that exists.

There are provisions within both the Criminal Code and other legislative frameworks that allow for national security to be used to circumvent part VI and the normal judicial processes required for surveillance operations. Minister, yes or no: Are you aware of that ever having been used while you've been Minister of Public Safety—yes or no?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I just want to be very clear that when these techniques are used, they're done in a manner that is compliant with the law. I've set out on a number of occasions how—

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Minister, I think my question was quite direct. There are national security exemptions that can be used to circumvent the typical processes. There's that judicial process, which you've expounded on quite fulsomely, within part VI of the Criminal Code. There are national security exemptions where these surveillance techniques can be used without fulfilling the full process outlined in part VI of the Criminal Code. To your knowledge, are you aware of that ever having taken place while you've been Minister of Public Safety—yes or no?