Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.
As Mr. Staples indicated, on behalf of the Rideau Institute and the Canadian Auto Workers we prepared a legal opinion and submitted it as a brief to Ministers Prentice and Bernier. The subject of the opinion is Canadian and U.S. law as they relate to Radarsat-2 and its ability to collect images of the earth and the way in which that information may be shared.
Because of the strategic importance of images collected by satellites such as this, Canada has legislation, the Remote Sensing Space Systems Act, which I'm sure you're familiar with, which stresses the strategic value of this information as, in the terms of the statute, being important to ensure “national security, the defence of Canada, the safety of Canadian Forces, Canada’s conduct of international relations, Canada’s international obligations”, and two other criteria that have been added by regulation under the act which have to do with the competitiveness of the Canadian space industry.
Under the act, in order to operate a satellite like this a company needs to obtain a licence. The act obliges the company to maintain control of the satellite and of the images it gathers, imposes certain constraints on the extent to which those images may be shared with other nations, and finally, asserts the right of the Government of Canada to priority access and in some cases to exclusive access to the information the satellite gathers, underscoring the strategic importance and value of the information that a satellite like this can collect.
The U.S., not surprisingly, has similar legislation. Their statute is called the Land Remote Sensing Policy Act, and it asserts the same types of public controls and public issue priorities that our legislation does. So the question naturally arose as to which legislation would apply if this sale were to go through, and it was quite clear—and we cite the provisions in our opinion—under the U.S. law that it would apply to Radarsat-2, if it were acquired by Alliant Technologies.
I'll just read the key provision from the consolidated federal regulations under section 960.2, as follows:
The Act and the regulations in this part apply to any person subject to the jurisdiction or control of the United States who operates or proposes to operate a private remote sensing space system, either directly or through an affiliate or subsidiary, and/or establishes substantial connections with the United States regarding the operation of a private remote sensing system.
We were told by ATK that it was going to incorporate a subsidiary, which would operate in Canada. But it's clear under the U.S. law that it would apply to a Canadian subsidiary of ATK operating in this country, with respect to the images collected by the satellite.
I'll just refer you to a couple of other provisions of the regulations. Under section 960.11:
The licensee shall maintain operational control from a location within the United States at all times, including the ability to override all commands issued by any operations centers or stations.
Because of the importance of the information gathered by the satellite, the U.S. is able to assert, as does Canada, priority control over the satellite and may issue directions, and this is under subsection (4) of section 960.11:
The licensee may be required by the Secretary to limit data collection and/or distribution by the system as determined to be necessary to meet significant national security or significant foreign policy concerns, or international obligations of the United States
I know the Minister of Industry has already made a preliminary determination, but given the importance of this legislation and the role of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, it seems appropriate for this committee to be inquiring into this issue as well.
We addressed our letter to both ministers because we believe that this issue of control of the images collected by the satellite has important implications for economic development in Canada, the north being only one such example. So it was appropriate for Minister Prentice to take all of this into account, but even more appropriate for your committee and for the Minister of Foreign Affairs to be apprised of the conflict between U.S. law and Canadian law as it relates to this satellite, if this sale were to proceed.
Thank you.