Information & Ethics Committee on Sept. 26th, 2022

[The Chair, Conservative, Pat Kelly]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome, everyone, to meeting number 35 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics.

The committee is now meeting in public to discuss matters related to committee business. This is a hybrid meeting, pursuant to the House order of June 23. I think we all know how that operates so I'll dispense with much of the explanation.

I see Monsieur Villemure would like to get in, but I'm just going to talk about—actually, no. Let's go ahead with that and I'll add some information at the end.

You had your hand up, René. Go ahead.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to move a motion that was distributed to committee members within the timeframe. The motion reads as follows:

That, in relation to its study of device investigation tools used by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the committee invite to testify in camera: (a) Michel Juneau-Katsuya, expert and researcher on national security and intelligence issues, for one hour to continue his testimony begun on Tuesday, August 9, 2022; (b) invite Richard Fadden, retired National Security Advisor, for one hour; (c) that these witnesses be heard no later than Wednesday September 28, 2022.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pat Kelly]

The motion is in order. It was distributed and on notice.

Do we have debate?

Ms. Khalid, go ahead.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Chair, I appreciate this motion. I was just wondering if we could get some clarity around if there's a specific theme that we wanted to hear from these witnesses. I know that we had these witnesses in the past and I'm just wondering if there was a specific objective for which we wanted to bring them in again.

I'd love to hear from members.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pat Kelly]

Before I open the floor up, I'm not speaking to the motion or against it, but maybe I'll just partly answer your question. I think there was discussion at the conclusion of the earlier meeting and there were expressions of the desirability to hear more. I take it this motion is in support of that notion, but I will open the floor up if there are others who want to address the question of Ms. Khalid.

Otherwise, did you have anything else that you wanted to add?

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

I understand that we wanted to hear more. I'm just wondering if there are specific themes from the testimony that we had received from these two witnesses prior that we wanted to highlight. I just want to make sure that we're not just replicating the work that we've already done. If there's somewhere concrete that we would like to go, I'd like to obviously work with the committee on that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pat Kelly]

Is there anybody else?

Seeing no further debate, I will put the motion to a vote.

(Motion agreed to on division)

I'm not aware that anyone else has a motion. I will just discuss t the calendar, then.

Per the motion we passed, we will devote this Wednesday to hearing the witnesses, presuming they can appear then. I would like us to be ready, perhaps at the conclusion of that meeting, to give drafting instructions to our witnesses. I guess Wednesday afternoon would be the time for either a motion to continue that study, or, in absence of a continuation of it, to give instructions to our analysts so that we can prepare the report on the device investigative tools study and get that concluded.

I would like to then proceed and will call meetings for the following week. It will depend. The priority would be to finish the facial recognition report. If we need more time for that next week, those meetings are available. If we should happen to conclude that in advance, I'd like to be ready to commence the access to information study, which we agreed to.

To that end, I will say now to all parties to please get witness lists for the access to information study as soon as possible. I know everyone prefers a deadline than just a call to do it as soon as possible. Is it reasonable for everyone, say, by Friday? I'm going to say Thursday as Friday is not a sitting day. I would ask everyone to have at least a preliminary list. It doesn't have to be an exhaustive list or your final list but a preliminary list at least of priority witnesses for the access to information study.

With that, if there are no other questions or committee business, I'm going to suspend so that we may go in camera and get to the consideration of the draft report on facial recognition.

Is there anyone with any further committee business? No.

[Proceedings continue in camera]