Citizenship and Immigration Committee on June 19th, 2012

[IIan Arnon]

I just want to point out that there's one other thing that can be checked. As someone exits, you can verify that the person is the rightful holder of that document or that the person who entered on that document is indeed the same person who left or is leaving on that same document. So you can guarantee that there is no fraud upon entry and then upon exit.

[Alain Giguère, NDP, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

I have one final question about data entry. You are dealing with five governments, but I assume that the Interpol is also involved for international warrants, and the UN for no-fly lists. I am also thinking about the different justice departments that do not allow people to leave the country with a child, in other words family abductions.

Once all that information is obtained, will you be able to make the situation more secure and prevent family abductions? Can you guarantee that all the information gathered will be secure and will not be available to the public at large? There are some very skilful hackers out there.

[Robert Bell]

Very true.

I think the example of family kidnappers is a good example to work with. If someone reports that a child is kidnapped, this would then be a flag to capture that child's face image, and perhaps the parent's face image if that's who you suspect, and then on the exit control have cameras looking for those people. It would be very effective.

Can we guarantee it? Probably not. Can we do very well? Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

Mr. Leung.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Welcome, gentlemen, to this hearing.

Canada is a multicultural country and we have people coming in from all over the world. My question has more to do with the level of cultural sensitivity that is built into the system and how we address some of these issues.

For example, people from Muslim countries could come in with names like Mohammad Mohammad Mohammad. The name and the surname is the same. You can have people with names like Osama, which is a Japanese surname as well as an Arabic surname. You could have 18 million Mr. Dungs coming in from China.

In some of the Asian countries I've been in, they use biometrics, in addition to matching the original national language, whether it's Chinese or Arabic, with the English translation, which can vary over time. There are other cases, like Mr. Lee, which is common to Chinese, Korean, and English surnames. Another great one is the Mr. Singhs, who are all over the Punjab.

If a person comes into Canada with that name, and he goes back and switches that with another person, how culturally sensitive are we to identifying potential abuses, as well as being culturally sensitive to the fact that there are a lot of potential errors that can surface from the complexity of dealing in multiple languages?

[Robert Bell]

There are a number of questions embedded in that.

We started with cultural sensitivity. In the case of face recognition, if that's your primary biometric for crossing a border, and if in a Muslim country they don't wish to have their face image taken, we would usually have an alternative for the person to provide a fingerprint. We would still match that person from who they say they are to a biometric, but the cultural sensitivity would be that they have a choice.

The nature of your other question was people with the same name—

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Switching documents.

[Robert Bell]

That's right. Switching documents is common, but once you match the document to the biometrics, face or finger, you can't switch the document without being found out. As soon as you put your passport down and take your picture or your fingerprint, the discrepancy shows.

With e-passports—and almost all countries, a hundred by the end of this year, will have those—the biometrics are embedded in a chip. It's very difficult to change that if you're forging a document. I think you really have a big step forward in the ability to verify that the person you're dealing with is the person they say they are, whether their name is the same or not.

The last one was all of those different spellings of Mohammad. Most countries we see have an ability to search on 112 spellings of “Mohammad”. I don't know if Canada has that, but I do know the U.K. does.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Within the technology that's available to you, at least the software, if someone comes in with a name like “Mr. Leung”, there are probably five variations of how you can spell that, and you are able to spot that and then match that to an appropriate fingerprint.

[Robert Bell]

I can speak for the U.K. system. The way the U.K. system works is that if there were a mismatch between the biometric and the spelling of the name, they would check the other potential spellings of the name just trying to avoid confusion and to facilitate the travel.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

Ms. James.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our guests.

I actually found it interesting, Mr. Bell, because a lot of what you talked about were things that actually came out in our previous work on Bill C-31 with regard to biometrics and security in this country. You hit the nail on the head when you said that we're lacking a lot of exit controls in this country, and also about the fact that we need to make sure that who applies is who arrives, and who arrives is actually the person they say they are. So I really appreciate—

[Robert Bell]

And if they leave.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Absolutely. So I appreciate your comments, because it really stresses the importance and the need we have here in Canada to move forward with biometrics for the safety and security of our citizens.

As well, I noted that you mentioned that countries like Australia and other countries we are compared against are in so many ways actually further ahead than we are, and we're actually playing catch-up right now. So I really appreciate your comments on that.

I'm going to ask you some questions regarding identity fraud. I think I know what your answer is going to be, from your testimony, but I just want to hear it again. In your opinion, right now how capable is our government in Canada in detecting multiple, stolen, or mistaken identities? I know you talked about someone who has come back into the country 17 times, so I'm pretty sure I know what your answer is going to be, but could you elaborate on that, please?

[Robert Bell]

I have no first-hand experience. I can only judge the system based on what I read in the newspapers. But I do see that there is a gap. I've seen newspaper articles that say that someone has left and has come back and they were let in and CBSA said that was because they had very good documents. I think the officer is doing the best he can. He is looking at that and says that's a very good document, but he doesn't have the tools he needs to be able to make a better judgment.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Absolutely. I appreciate your answer on that.

Overall, what do you think the impact is on Canada, and on the security of Canadians in this country, of not having those measures in place right now? If we were to delay this for whatever reason, what do you think the impact will be on Canada as a whole, and on our security?

[Robert Bell]

Of course it's unknown, isn't it? We just don't know who is coming across our borders. We just don't know when and how we're going to have a problem. I don't think there's a good answer, but it's a worry.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

I agree with you, I think it is a worry. I know my constituents in Scarborough Centre would also be very concerned about this. I know I've had several letters come in from watching the committee and from some of the testimony that's come out in previous committee work, so it is an ongoing concern. I'm very thankful that we're moving ahead with our other bill.

We've talked briefly, and we've had questions from the other side of the table and from a colleague on this side as well, regarding the cost of actually moving forward and getting the fingerprints and all that. But what do you think the cost is to Canada and the Canadian taxpayers for the person who has been deported 17 times? What do you think the cost of that would be for the government to have to track these people down, find them, take them through the judicial process and get them out of the country once again? That has to be an enormous cost and burden on Canadian taxpayers as a whole.

[Robert Bell]

I would think it's verging on seven figures to get someone out of the country. I don't have numbers, but that would be my impression about every time you have to go through that process.

The other cost is their criminal activity. I don't know what that cost would be, but clearly those are not the actions we want happening in our country.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

I actually agree with you. First, I have the responsibility to represent my constituents and make sure that their tax dollars are well spent. But to be honest, I'm more concerned about the crime and the criminal factor. If someone's been charged with a serious crime, enough to have the person deported out of Canada, the fact that he or she is able to slip through the cracks and come back again and again and again is even further proof that we need to proceed in this fashion and move forward with biometrics as quickly as possible.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

Our time has come to an end. I want to thank you, Mr. Bell, Mr. Arnon, and Monsieur Meunier, for taking the time. Your contribution has been very helpful to the committee in our preparation of our report. Thank you for coming.

The next part of the meeting will be in camera, for confidential purposes. The clerk will be asking all those who aren't supposed to be here not to be here.

[Proceedings continue in camera]