Evidence of meeting #136 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was content.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Gerald Kerr-Wilson  Partner, Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP, Business Coalition for Balanced Copyright
Scott Smith  Senior Director, Intellectual Property and Innovation Policy, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
David Fewer  Director, Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic
John Lawford  Executive Director and General Counsel, Public Interest Advocacy Centre
Dan Albas  Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, CPC
David de Burgh Graham  Laurentides—Labelle, Lib.
Michael Chong  Wellington—Halton Hills, CPC
Clerk of the Committee  Mr. Michel Marcotte

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy

We're going to stick to that point of order.

Do you want to speak to that point of order?

5:10 p.m.

NDP

Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON

Yes, just really quickly. They don't even have “chief statistician” in the original motion. He's suggesting somebody come who is not even in the original motion, and Michael is right with regard to the issue of “study” and so forth. At any rate, whether it can be in order or not, we've had a lot of time with this motion before today. It's been in our packages for over a week. We're talking about one hour with somebody who's not even in the original motion. I don't even know how it gets on the floor.

5:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy

Does anybody else want to speak to the point of order that's been put forward?

5:10 p.m.

Liberal

Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON

I'm trying to make sure it's on the point of order. There were substantial changes. If we're looking at two different things, I think what we're trying to get on the table is what Statistics Canada is doing, and, right now, they're working on something with the Privacy Commissioner, from what I've heard in the House, regarding what form this pilot would take, when it would be initiated and all of that.

I'm not sure that a study would get to that if it's something that's currently in process. I don't think we're in a position to do a study on something that hasn't been brought back to us yet.

5:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy

Okay.

With the motion you submitted and what you've put forward, it is probably a little bit of a stretch in that. I understand that you're trying to find that compromise, but given the challenge of trying to amend the motion so that it works, it doesn't seem to work here. At this point, I don't think I can rule in favour of your amendment because it is a bit of a substantial change.

Michael.

5:10 p.m.

Wellington—Halton Hills, CPC

Michael Chong

Are you done with the point of order?

5:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy

Having said that, I rule the amendment out of order at that point. Thank you.

It's your turn.

5:10 p.m.

Wellington—Halton Hills, CPC

Michael Chong

Mr. Chair, thank you.

I'd like to move an amendment to the motion that after the word “invite” would add the words “the chief statistician”.

5:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy

The chief statistician is not in there. Do you want to add it in?

5:10 p.m.

Wellington—Halton Hills, CPC

Michael Chong

Yes, add “the chief statistician”, so that the first part of the amendment would be to add those three words after the word “invite”. After the comma, after the word “officials”, add “former Ontario privacy commissioner Ann Cavoukian”. The third part of the amendment would be to add, in front of the words “the chief statistician and”, “Minister Bains”. It would read, “invite Minister Bains, the chief statistician and Statistics Canada officials, and former Ontario privacy commissioner Ann Cavoukian”.

That's my amendment, Mr. Chair.

5:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy

Is there any debate on this proposed amendment?

5:10 p.m.

Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, CPC

Dan Albas

I just want to show my support for it simply because, if you look at it, among other witnesses, he's just added someone who has been active on this. I think you mean Ms. Cavoukian from Ryerson. Is that right? She's been speaking out quite publicly on this, and there's a lot of interest in this.

I would hope that all members would support this, not just our role in terms of accountability by having the minister in but also in terms of the concerns that are out there in the public that should be addressed. This committee is uniquely positioned to do that. I hope all members will vote in favour. I've received a number of phone calls and emails from people who are very concerned about this project.

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy

Is there any further debate on the amendment?

Brian.

5:15 p.m.

NDP

Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON

I am supporting it in the main motion. The amendment is important because it does bridge the intent of what was made earlier and it makes a lot of sense.

Other witnesses as well would be the former chief statisticians and others who would be germane to this, so it is a great opportunity for us to get something to the House.

Thank you.

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy

Okay.

Is there any further debate?

The vote is on the amendment first.

5:15 p.m.

Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, CPC

Dan Albas

I'd like a recorded vote.

(Amendment negatived: nays 5; yeas 4)

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy

The amendment is defeated, and we're now back to the original motion.

Is there any debate on the original motion?

5:15 p.m.

Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, CPC

Dan Albas

I just would encourage all members. There are a lot of people, I'm sure, in each of our ridings who are concerned. This is a way for us to carry out our parliamentary functions.

It's obviously too bad that we're not inviting the minister, because I know from his attention to this in the House that this is something I'm sure he would love to speak to. That being said, the witness list that we have here is still consistent and would bring forward a number of voices that need to be heard.

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy

Celina.

5:15 p.m.

Celina Caesar-Chavannes Whitby, Lib.

With that said, there are still ongoing conversations with the Privacy Commissioner and Statistics Canada, and I totally understand the level of interest in this particular file from all of our constituents. However, in this course of studying a particular initiative that's happening, we should let the process run its course with the Privacy Commissioner and Statistics Canada before we go ahead with anything further.

That sums up where I'm going.

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy

Brian.

5:15 p.m.

NDP

Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON

We would abdicate our responsibility if we didn't look at it. If the same logic applied, then we would fold our tent on our copyright study, because the USMCA has been signed, and it has compromised our copyright review.

As well, the minister has pronounced some changes to the Copyright Board, so we have things that are in the mix of our process that we're currently doing right now. Having the motion in front of us is a reasonable approach to dealing with some of the things that have changed. We saw legislation that was passed three years ago that mandated a different way of data collection. That was some of the debate that took place with regard to the bill, and it's coming home to roost right now, because what was debated quite earnestly at that time was the fact that Shared Services Canada was going to do some of the data collection and, in that process, use third party agreements, including from the banks, as part of the changes that took place with Statistics Canada.

What's happening now is that the process of moving from the long-form census problems with the previous government in terms of its response rate diminishing and the changes that have been brought about for data collection through the digital age have required a better oversight process. This motion only brings light to all those different issues.

One of two things will happen. Either Canadians will be further enlightened about the current situation, and they'll have officials from Statistics Canada and others who would come forth, and they would also have privacy ones who can sort out the changes that have taken place.

We have legislation that really is just coming into the moving parts of its body right now that shocked Canadians, and that's the bottom line. It's something that's appropriate for this committee to do.

The committee can do one of two things at this point in time. We can almost self-declare our irrelevancy. We've kind of been doing that in the last little bit by defeating motions that had to do with emergency preparedness, the CRTC and other things we've had that are quite reasonable. They haven't been long. They haven't been ways we could define or destroy the work we are doing on copyright.

Again, this is a reasonable approach to try to get to some answers. I don't think there is any reason not to do this.

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy

Thank you.

Mr. Jowhari.

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

Majid Jowhari Liberal Richmond Hill, ON

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to go back to the spirit that I understood from the point that Mr. Graham brought. This is trying to get an understanding of what this initiative, whether it's called a pilot project or study, is all about. This is why, I think, if we actually ask the chief statistician to come and explain to us what was behind this, then we're going to be in a much better position to go back to Mr. Albas's motion. We would be able to make sure that, now that we understand what the scope or the intent is, we could then say these are the extra witnesses we want, and now we want to study, and the study should be x number of sessions, etc.

Honestly, I don't want to reject this, but what I also need, as a member, to make sure I'm doing the job that I need to do for my constituents, is to try to understand what it is that drove Statistics Canada to initiate this initiative, whether it's a pilot or whether it came on a Friday afternoon. What is the driver behind it? Once we understand that, then it's most logical for us to go back to this study and say, “Let's do a study for that.” That's all I wanted to add to the record.

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy

Thank you.

Is there any further debate? If there's no further debate, then we will vote.