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.
9:20 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Thank you, Mr. Dubé and Mr. Therrien.
Madam Dabrusin, welcome to the committee.
9:20 a.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
I'm happy to be here.
Thanks to all of you. I found it interesting to hear what you were talking about.
I was reviewing some of the earlier testimony on this issue, Monsieur Therrien, and Mr. Bolduc from the CBSA mentioned that he had had a recommendation from the Privacy Commissioner of Canada to put up signs at the land borders to inform travellers that information will be shared. I was wondering if you can confirm that. Also, have you made other recommendations in respect of notice to people at land border crossings?
9:20 a.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Yes, I can confirm that a number of years ago our office recommended that travellers be advised through this notice. Notices do appear at land borders.
More generally, I would say that we've impressed on government departments and agencies, including CBSA, the need to be transparent in the uses that will be made of the information. There's progress there in the information that was made public by the government, including Minister Goodale, on the uses to which the information would be put.
9:20 a.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
Were there any specific types of things? I believe he started listing some of the things that are on the forms people fill out when travelling, for example.
October 17th, 2017 / 9:20 a.m.
Lara Ives Acting Director General, Audit and Review, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
I'll just add that through the PIA process some specific recommendations we made that CBSA was receptive to had to do with the retention of the information. Originally when we were approached, the planned retention period was 75 years for CBSA, but through discussions with them, that has been lowered to 15 years. I will add that we're still unclear as to the necessity for the 15-year retention period. In our opinion, that could also be quite long, but in comparison to the 75 years, it's obviously better.
Also, with regard to information-sharing agreements with the United States, we've been provided copies of those through the PIA, and then, of course, the notices that you have brought up. Throughout all of our discussions on PIAs, we always engage in discussions on the necessity for the information collected and disclosed, as well as the effectiveness, so that while they might not be able to demonstrate it from the outset, they have mechanisms in place to gauge that and they can tailor the program along the way.
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
Thank you.
Monsieur Dubé raised the fact that there has actually been a framework in place for information collection since 2013. Reviewing what has been in place since 2013, are you satisfied that the mechanisms already in place are sufficiently robust to protect privacy information?
9:25 a.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
I would not go that far. I would say that the uses to which the government wants to put the information are important public policy objectives that make the collection and sharing of information reasonable at the level of principle, but it is very important to make sure that the way in which this is done is privacy sensitive, including the issue of retention periods.
That is why we're setting out our expectation to see further PIAs for further elaboration, but also that we see information-sharing agreements, because many safeguards or limits on how to implement this principle will be seen in these detailed documents, agreements, and PIAs, and we want to be engaged with government departments in that process, because these are important documents.
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
You've mentioned specifically the retention period, which has come up.
9:25 a.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Yes.
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
Is that the primary concern or are there others you have as well?
9:25 a.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
What we call “secondary uses” would be another important consideration.
If CBSA collects this information and transparently sends it to, say, the RCMP for law enforcement or to help in dealing with Amber Alerts, that's the primary purpose, but agreements should then define what other purposes should be contemplated.
On that issue in particular, we think it would be important that we be consulted to make sure that the secondary purposes are privacy sensitive.
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
Because I am new to this committee, I'm trying to clarify this. My understanding is that so far you have been consulted, that you have been part of this process as far as being consulted on what these agreements would look like. Is that...?
9:25 a.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Have we seen agreements?
9:25 a.m.
Acting Director General, Audit and Review, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
We haven't seen agreements with the institutions that CBSA intends to share the exit information with.
9:25 a.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
We've had some good exchanges, but we're still looking for some details from government departments.
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
The other question I had was with respect to the review. You said that you intend to “carefully review retention schedules”—
9:25 a.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Yes.
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
—and “request that clear justifications be provided”. Just to clarify it for me, as part of that review, what will you be doing to ensure that as you're doing the review everything is being done to protect privacy information?
9:25 a.m.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
The principle that we will try to apply in that review is that even if it is reasonable to collect the information, the information should only be retained by government so long as it is necessary for the purpose for which it was collected or for other reasonable secondary purposes.
CBSA has told us that they have changed their retention schedule from 75 to 15 years. That's good. We still don't know why it's 15 years. How is that related to the purposes for which they are collecting and potentially sharing the information? It is that kind of detail that is necessary to determine whether the retention period is adequate or not, and that is true for each and every purpose, including the collection of information from all travellers, the vast majority of whom are law abiding, to identify threats to national security or otherwise. It's fine for the assessment to occur, but we will try to make sure in these reviews that the information is only retained by government so long as it is necessary to make the required assessment.
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Thank you, Madam Dabrusin and Mr. Therrien.
Mr. Motz, you have five minutes, please.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to everyone for your attendance today.
Mr. Fortin, I have just a couple of questions that I want to get some clarity on. With Bill C-21, there are going to be some adjustments to expectations for people in business. Do you expect there to be any obstacles to or resistance from individuals who are travelling or businesses who are in the business of exporting goods?