Evidence of meeting #49 for Public Safety and National Security in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was decision.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:05 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
I cannot comment on whether or not that question was asked at the time. There's no documentation.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Okay. That's fair.
Last December our current public safety minister was sworn in and then found out about it in January, when SIRC released their report. What did the current minister ask you to do when he found out about the SIRC report?
5:10 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
Well, the SIRC report didn't say, “What you're doing is illegal”. The SIRC report only raised the issue that, according to SIRC, the service had not fully briefed the Federal Court on this program.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Okay. Our minister mentioned something today about asking you to take some measures when he found out about it.
5:10 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
Well, when he found out about the court decision.
5:10 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
When the court decision came out this fall, then the minister.... Actually, we had already taken measures such as stopping access and analysis. That's what the....
5:10 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
Yes, just to make it even more confusing, it's metadata that—
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
I know. That term kept coming up a lot. I think you described it as nothing more than what's on the outside of an envelope, you and Commissioner Paulson. It's a little more—
5:10 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
I don't remember exactly what I said. I remember saying “the envelope”. I'm not sure if I said “nothing more”.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
It may not have been you, in fairness. I just remember the two of you trying to describe it. It could have been Commissioner Paulson at the time.
5:10 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
What I'm saying is that I remember one of the two of us using that, that it's like the address on an envelope, nothing more, almost minimizing the importance of metadata, which certainly was not my intent, if I said that.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
We've had a lot of testimony since then, and as well in another committee that I sit on, where we're looking at cyber-violence, that metadata is a lot more than that, and that you can actually get an awful lot of information from that associated data or metadata. I guess where I'm going with this is that you were collecting this information on innocent people for 10 years, and you still have it now. Is that right?
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
It's just not being accessed.
You've had the ability to share that information under Bill C-51. Was any of that information shared with other departments?
5:10 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
The only information out of that metadata-associated data bank we would share is when we've done analyses and we can link a piece of that metadata to a threat.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Because SIRC only looks at you, not the RCMP and the other agencies. Is that right?
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
I'm just wondering whether any of that associated data was shared with other agencies that wouldn't have been subject to the SIRC review.
5:10 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
No, we wouldn't share raw metadata with other agencies. As I said, we would only share it once we've made the link between that metadata and a threat-related activity.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
I know there's been some discussion about whether or not the act needs to be changed. You're doing your own policies and procedures. One of the things we're looking at is making sure we're respecting people's privacy, while at the same time ensuring that Canadians are safe and secure.
Is there anything you could recommend that we could be putting in changes to the act that would help us to do this, or am I putting you in a difficult position?
5:10 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
What I would say is the national security framework review that is ongoing is the place to have that discussion, because it seeks to achieve those two objectives: keeping the public safe and safeguarding our rights and freedoms.
The only thing I would add to this is that Judge Noël was clear on two points. One is that it was probably time to review the CSIS Act after 33 years, but also very important—because at one point someone mentioned the non-threat-related metadata and destroying it or not using it would have no impact on national security—Judge Noël actually acknowledged, after seeing the evidence, the usefulness of that program.
What people need to understand is that a piece of data that is non-threat related today could actually help us connect the dots or make links a year from now. I'm not arguing that, but all I'm saying is that before we make a decision, we have to have all the facts and really understand the potential usefulness.