Evidence of meeting #33 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 video is available from Parliament.
4:30 p.m.
Professor of Political Science, and Director, Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, University of Toronto, As an Individual
Which we have not done, unfortunately, in contrast to the United States.
4:30 p.m.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
You're absolutely right.
Mr. Juneau‑Katsuya, the revelation that elected officials can be recruited by foreign governments was troubling to me.
Can you provide the committee with a document or some observations to help us dig deeper into the issue?
4:30 p.m.
Expert and Researcher on National Security and Intelligence, As an Individual
I don't have any official documents. That analysis is based on the experience I've gained over the years.
For more specific information, you should reach out to the official agencies, mainly CSIS. In a television interview, former CSIS director Richard Fadden said that a number of elected officials at various levels of government had been compromised. I think the law enforcement agencies would have a lot of information on that.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Thank you very much.
Ms. McPhail, you mentioned part VI of the Criminal Code and the fact that it has been 20 years since it's been revisited. I think both you and Mr. Deibert have talked at length about the ways and the order of magnitude in which technology has far surpassed legislative guardrails or considerations. Part VI was cited at length and very frequently by both the minister responsible and the witnesses from the RCMP.
Can you comment from your perspective and opinion on ways in which you think, under the current legislation, the current laws in part VI, there remains a big gap in where we are now with these types of technological powers?
4:30 p.m.
Director, Privacy, Technology and Surveillance Program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
Part VI of the Criminal Code—and I remind the committee that I'm not a lawyer, although I work for a legal advocacy organization—is generally written to be technologically neutral and to allow for the right kinds of inquiries to be made with the right safeguards, but, because the technology has changed so fundamentally my point was simply that those who are expert in the use of this part should ideally be allowed to comment on the ways in which it should be enhanced. I'm not the best person to comment on it; I simply wish to flag that it was a really important consideration.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Yes. Is it a consideration that you would put as a recommendation from this committee that we recommend the government review part VI to ensure that it's in keeping with the advances in technology?
4:30 p.m.
Director, Privacy, Technology and Surveillance Program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
Yes. That is my recommendation.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
4:30 p.m.
Professor of Political Science, and Director, Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, University of Toronto, As an Individual
That's correct.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I'll put the question to our last witness, whose name has escaped me; I apologize.
Is that something you would agree with, that part VI perhaps hasn't necessarily kept pace with technology and could, for the good and welfare of democracy and everything you've espoused in your testimony, provide that updated information and legal analysis?
4:30 p.m.
Expert and Researcher on National Security and Intelligence, As an Individual
It's a must.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Pat Kelly
Thank you.
With that, we will move to Mr. Williams for up to five minutes.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON
Thank you very much.
Through you, Mr. Chair, this is to both Professor Deibert and Ms. McPhail.
Municipal and provincial police are not subject to the Privacy Act. Is that correct?
4:35 p.m.
Director, Privacy, Technology and Surveillance Program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
Yes.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON
I'd ask both of you, with regard to recommendations to this committee, what parts of the Criminal Code should we be amending or making recommendations on to deal with these new techniques at this time?
4:35 p.m.
Director, Privacy, Technology and Surveillance Program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
As we just discussed, part VI of the Criminal Code is the relevant section on electronic surveillance that requires a review.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON
Sorry. I meant to say as it regards provincial and municipal police forces as well and their use of this technology.
4:35 p.m.
Director, Privacy, Technology and Surveillance Program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
Because policing is a provincial and territorial responsibility, there is actually a patchwork of different pieces of legislation that is relevant. That's part of an overarching problem in assuring that all police forces across the country adhere to golden, best standards when it comes to uses of surveillance technologies.
This is why, rather than doing a patchwork approach of encouraging provinces to amend a series of pieces of legislation in each of their jurisdictions, I recommend that there should be a federal advisory body to produce advisory bulletins, which those provinces can then take forward and attempt to implement within their own jurisdictions to achieve consistency and best practices across the country.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON
Thank you.
Professor, do you have anything to add to that?
4:35 p.m.
Professor of Political Science, and Director, Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, University of Toronto, As an Individual
Yes. I would add that I am not a lawyer, but one thing I have observed from my research globally is that the spyware industry has a very strong appetite to sell to local law enforcement, where the abuses tend to be more problematic. Of course, they want to do this because it opens up new, prospective clients. I have great concern, beyond the RCMP, that there may be other agencies that have used these investigative techniques and we've not yet found out about them.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON
Mr. Juneau-Katsuya, you talked about this use of the current technology that we're talking about today being used in other government departments. I'm going to ask you specifically whether you know of other technologies. I mean, this technology we're talking about today was developed a decade ago. Are there new technologies?
I understand that you haven't been around some agencies for a little while, but do you know of any other technologies being used that this committee is not talking about today?
4:35 p.m.
Expert and Researcher on National Security and Intelligence, As an Individual
You would need to be a little bit more precise. For what purposes are—