Evidence of meeting #77 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 c-21.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
Mr. Fortin, first let me thank you for addressing some points in your opening presentation. You introduced a number of very specific items that will be useful for the committee and that raise some very good questions.
Can you tell me this to start with? For border services, what is the biggest security feature in Bill C-21? What will really happen as a result, in terms of Canada's security?
National President, Customs and Immigration Union
Certainly, the ability to obtain more information increases the responsibilities. Earlier, when I was replying to your colleague Mr. Picard, I said that the bill would allow us to have a clearer history on people, to focus on the higher risk people and to let the lower risk people go on their way. As things stand, I can tell you that that is going to help. Given its objective, Bill C-21 is going to allow that information to be collected more efficiently.
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
But I would still like to have more of the practical details.
For people travelling to the United States by air, Canada border services get information about them after they have crossed the border, when they are already in the United States. Airlines are going to send their passenger manifests. For people travelling by land, the information arrives 15 minutes later. That is what the minister told us. So how will that let you intervene beforehand? It will already be too late.
If you receive information that a person should not have crossed the border, do you have a relationship with the Americans that allows them to find and send that person back as a matter of urgency? How will that work?
National President, Customs and Immigration Union
We are not yet clear on the speed of the response after Bill C-21 goes into effect. Will it really happen in real time? That would be the ideal, between you and me.
What is for sure is that, at the moment, it takes a certain amount of time. We have been told that it is also a matter of 15 minutes.
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Okay.
Earlier, you talked a little about the lack of resources. This summer, we had a major problem with illegal migrants crossing the border at Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle and at a spot in Manitoba.
Do you feel that the new rules in Bill C-21 is going to increase your workload considerably? The minister told us that it would actually all be done electronically and that there would be no real impact on the officers’ actual work. Do you think that the bill will have a major effect on your work every day?
National President, Customs and Immigration Union
Absolutely. In our opinion, just having to start entering more data will affect our work. The critical thing, you know, is to be efficient and not to increase wait times. However, if we have to do more exit processing and pay more specific attention to the goods bound for departure, that clearly cannot be done electronically. We will need more officers.
You mentioned what happened last summer. Clearly, since 2016, front-line officers have been spending their time telling us that they do not have enough resources. It’s already the case now, so imagine what will happen if the officers' workload increases.
In my opening presentation, I said that 1,200 of our positions have been eliminated. That is huge. In itself, Bill C-21 will increase security, without doubt. However, it is certain that we will need resources to implement the bill properly. At the moment, I really doubt that we have the resources we need.
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Therrien, when the minister appeared here, I asked a question about the exchange of information, specifically in terms of employment insurance. I was told that the information would not be sent to those administrating employment insurance.
In your opening comments, you mentioned that, in fact, the information would be used to see if someone was crossing to the United States, when they normally should be looking for a job.
As you see it, or according to what you have been told, will the information be sent to various federal departments? That is what you understood, is it not?
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
To federal departments, yes.
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
However, the minister told us that such would not be the case. The committee has to look at that closely. I asked the question and the answer was that the information clearly would not be distributed among departments. I am not against the idea, but I just want to make sure that we have the right information.
So, you are confirming that, in terms of privacy, you are comfortable with that, since it is one of the things that Canada has to be doing.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
It is reasonable, especially given the non-sensitive nature of the information being exchanged.
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
At the start of your presentation, you made two points. You mentioned that, since 2013, the Canada Border Services Agency has been collecting information on non-Canadians and permanent residents. You were careful to emphasize that. You then said that information would now be collected on Canadian citizens.
Can you explain why you were insistent on that?
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
The entry/exit program needs to be examined from a broader historical perspective.
It is important to remember that in the past, democratic countries did not collect information on the exits of their citizens. This was related to the freedom of movement of citizens, and the government didn't control this kind of activity.
Following the events in September 2001, several countries imposed the collection of information or gathered information for border management and national security purposes. Canada was among the last to do so.
To date, the information collected has focused on non-Canadians for border management and national security purposes. According to the Bill C-21, the gathering of information and the sharing of information will also apply to citizens.
It is important to understand that we are crossing a boundary. Historically, democratic countries did not collect this kind of information about their citizens. However, things have changed as a result of the events in September 2001, and it is now a widespread practice that also aims to ensure the integrity of social programs. We are moving in this direction.
Given the importance of combatting fraud involving these programs, and the relatively limited and non-sensitive nature of the information, this seems reasonable. However, it must be understood that this evolution in the history of democratic countries has occurred.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Thank you, Mr. Paul-Hus and Mr. Therrien.
Mr. Dubé, you have the floor for seven minutes.
October 17th, 2017 / 9:15 a.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
It is sometimes dangerous in politics to discuss hypothetical situations. However, let's take a case where the information would go to CSIS, for instance, and there would be programs in place with the Five Eyes allies, including the United States. Would it be possible to have a broader sharing than what is explicitly set out in Bill C-21?
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
As you know, I have commented on Bill C-51 as to the standard under which information-sharing is permitted. In my opinion, the standard established under Bill C-51 is too permissive when it comes to information sharing. I stand by those comments.
You are asking if there is a risk that the sharing is too broad. That's why I insist on the purposes for which the information is collected and shared. In this case, it's a matter of national security. It's quite possible that the sharing is reasonable for an individual who presents a national security risk. However, when it comes to sharing information on all travellers who leave Canada to go to the United States, there is obviously a question of sharing information about law-abiding citizens, in order to target individuals who may be problematic from a national security perspective. This is a reasonable step. However, as soon as this mass of information shared with CSIS, for example, indicates that people are not posing a risk, it is important that the information be destroyed and not used. That's why I'm talking about a period of data retention.
The gathering of information and the initial sharing of information for national security purposes may be reasonable, but it is important to have retention rules that require the destruction of documents as soon as a person is considered a traveller and not a national security risk.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
Perfect.
My next question is about the regulatory changes. Their scope in Bill C-21 is fairly broad.
Proposed subclause 92(2) in clause 2 of Bill C-21 states:
… (a) prescribing the sources from which the information may be collected;
(b) respecting the circumstances in which the information may be collected; and
(c) respecting the time within which and the manner in which the information may be collected.
A similar proposal is set out in proposed subclause 93(5).
Do you think this is something that would require a little more precision or some kind of protection? These are publicly posted changes, but we know that regulatory changes are not subject to the same kind of debate as bills.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
In this regard, the bill itself defines the pieces of information that will be collected and shared. So, this is already a level of transparency that needs to be noted. In terms of whether the bill gives the government too much regulatory power to set the terms for the collection of information, personally, I'm already satisfied that the elements are well-defined at the outset.
Of course, with respect to the content of the regulations, like other terms and conditions of programs, we expect them to be shared with us, because the terms and conditions will be used to determine the impacts on privacy. However, I'm not prepared to say that it's unacceptable to have discretionary power within the regulations, insofar as the bill already specifies what information will be collected.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
The program was implemented in 2013 to gather information on non-citizens and permanent residents. Have you received any complaints about the execution of the program since 2013?
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Our task at the office has been to conduct the privacy impact assessment. In this respect, we have made a significant and consistent commitment. To my knowledge, there have been no complaints so far, but we can confirm that information.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
Thank you.
We asked the representatives of the various departments how citizens can challenge the information. They told us it would be the responsibility of the department involved, such as, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada or Employment and Social Development Canada. In fact, it would be the responsibility of the department that would open the investigation into the citizen, whether it involved employment insurance or an application for citizenship or permanent residence, for instance.
Do you think it's necessary to provide citizens with a way to challenge so that they can complain directly to the Canada Border Services Agency if they believe that the information gathered about them, such as the time and date of departure, is incorrect?
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
There are several purposes for which information will be collected and shared. Some of them are related to national security. In these cases, the newly created parliamentary committee and the new National Security and Intelligence Review Agency could be redress for citizens.
And there are purposes for which information will be collected and shared that have nothing to do with national security. In fact, we can ask ourselves whether there should be internal redress to judge the quality of the information.