Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Sept. 25th, 2018

[Stéphane Perrault]

When we discussed the third party rules, I said that this is not an airtight regime, but how far can you go? There's a point when you need to consider freedom of speech. I also raised the point that the rules for third parties provide quite an extensive regulatory burden compared to that imposed on parties and candidates. So I leave that for the committee—

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Sorry, would you describe the burden as higher on third parties than it is on political parties and candidates?

[Stéphane Perrault]

Absolutely, because they need to do a report when they register—parties do that as well—but they also need to do a report pre-writ, and they need to do a report on September 15 with fixed-date elections. Parties don't do reports, just in the beginning of the electoral period, and candidates don't have to do that either.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

As it's described right now, the burdens placed on those in civil society who would fall into this third party regime are more onerous than those we place upon ourselves as political parties and candidates. Is that fair?

[Stéphane Perrault]

In some respects, yes, but not in every respect.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

In terms of the money—because we've asked the government where the figure came from, where the pre-writ time came from—are there any indications as to the source of those? Is it that other similar democracies use such a limit in terms of money and time?

[Stéphane Perrault]

I don't know the nature of the inquiries done by the government policy advisers. On the length of the pre-writ period, I did say that I was happy to see that it existed but in a relatively short period. I would be more concerned, both from a charter point of view and from a balanced point of view, if you had long pre-writ spending limits. Then you risk creating a situation where the government could spend on advertising but not the parties. By having a short pre-writ period, essentially in the summer prior to the fixed-date election, soon thereafter the government's rules on advertising kick in, and perhaps that will be addressed. So there's a bit of balance there that you can achieve with a short pre-writ period.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Essentially, a new law like this one would restrict, in this case, opposition parties from advertising in a zone in which the government was still permitted to advertise and promote certain policies. I'm trying to understand the scenario you're describing.

[Stéphane Perrault]

I'm saying that this law has a pre-writ limit that is sufficiently short so that it minimizes that concern.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Right. The concern exists but perhaps it's been minimized.

[Stéphane Perrault]

Correct.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I'll just step back for my final moment here to the responsibility of social media agencies. I want to get this testimony right, both with respect to ads—using the social media platforms and the search engine platforms—and how certain news is brought forward, particularly on the search side of things. Do you have any concerns? This bill does not address much of that at all. The way Canadians receive their news now is not how they did 30 years ago, and the algorithms built into the search engines and the social media searches have a bias built within them. I don't mean that in a negative way, but certain news is going to come to me that isn't going to come to you or to another Canadian.

Do you think there needs to be more understanding of how that all works, for us as legislators and for you as somebody who runs our elections?

[Stéphane Perrault]

Absolutely. However, this goes well beyond the issue of elections. It's a much larger problem than elections. It's a problem of great magnitude, and we've seen it in other countries, like Burma, where some terrible things have been happening because social media is basically the only way they get their news. There are some biases, as you say.

It's a very large problem. It's one that needs to be taken seriously, but it goes well beyond the electoral mandate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Thank you.

We've finished our regular round. Does anyone have any urgent questions before we go into our other business?

Mr. Simms, go ahead.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

I want to follow up on what Mr. Cullen talked about. In the context of social media, I think the question is very pertinent to this, in the sense of how people get their news. Now it comes from different channels, and obviously.... It's not so much different channels as the fact that, as Mr. Cullen pointed out, the news you get isn't the same news I have access to. It may be based on usage. It may be based on past searches and so on.

Clause 61 talks about publishing false statements to affect election results. What's captured in here, obviously, is misinformation about citizenship, place of birth, education, professional qualifications and that sort of thing. It's just outright lying about another individual. How does this capture some of what Mr. Cullen is talking about, when it comes to social media? How are you going to police this in the new realm of social media?

[Stéphane Perrault]

I think Mr. Cullen's concern was much broader than that.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Sure. I'm trying to be more precise here.

[Stéphane Perrault]

This is prohibiting a narrow scope of disinformation.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Yes, but the arena is quite large.

[Stéphane Perrault]

It is quite large. I invite anyone who's interested to read the report of the U.K. House of Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee. On July 24, they published the first interim report on disinformation and fake news. It canvasses some of these issues and makes some recommendations.

One of the areas we need to look at down the road is bringing a bit more transparency into the ads that are being posted on social media. Who is behind those ads?

We already have some rules. Perhaps they can be improved over time. As I said, it's a complex issue and it goes beyond elections. Committees often do good work, and this is an example. I invite you to have a look at it.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

We've practically launched into a whole other study here. Nevertheless, I want to feel that there's a level of confidence that you can exercise some of your concerns about false statements during an election, in either the pre-writ or the writ period.

[Stéphane Perrault]

My main responsibility is to make sure Canadians don't receive false information about when and how to register and vote. That's the core of my mandate.

Then there are a number of offences that are either currently in the act or in the bill, such as creating fake websites that pretend to be a candidate or a party. I've recommended that Elections Canada be included in that list as well. It's not currently in the bill. This was in my list of recommendations when I appeared in the spring.

These are additional tools that the commissioner would then use for enforcement. I'll be focusing on the information about the process. He will be focusing on whether there is disinformation that may fall into one of the prohibited categories, either in the current law or in the bill.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Thank you.

Mr. Cullen, go ahead.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I just want to ask a quick question on that. Is it not an offence to create a fake Elections Canada website?

[Stéphane Perrault]

There's currently a personation offence that was created in 2014. The commissioner has raised the concern that the personation offence may not be drafted in a way that would sufficiently clearly capture a fake Elections Canada website or document, or that of a party or a candidate. We've made a recommendation to include that.

In the recommendations report, we only spoke about parties and candidates, for a reason that escapes me. It's obviously a mistake on our part. We did not include Elections Canada. When I appeared last time, I suggested that we be included in that list.