Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good evening. As said, my name is Robert Ghiz. I'm the president and CEO of the Canadian Telecommunications Association. I'm joined today by our senior vice-president, Eric Smith.
The Canadian Telecommunications Association is dedicated to building a better future for Canadians through connectivity. Our association includes carriers, manufacturers and other companies that invest in Canada's world‑class telecommunication networks.
We appreciate the opportunity to speak to you today about our association's views on Bill C‑26.
The security of Canada's telecommunications system is of the utmost importance. Our members recognize that their services are critical to the social and economic well-being of Canadians, as well as to their security and safety. Accordingly, our members invest significant resources to safeguard their systems and infrastructure from cyber-attacks and other threats.
Members also actively participate in the Canadian security telecommunications advisory committee, or CSTAC, which facilitates the exchange of information between the private and public sectors, as well as strategic collaboration on current and evolving issues that may affect telecommunications systems, including cybersecurity threats. In addition to providing connectivity services, many of our telecommunications service providers also deliver cybersecurity solutions to businesses across the country, helping them protect their operations against cyber-attacks.
In other words, our industry takes security seriously and is committed to the security of the Canadian telecommunications system. As such, we share the Government of Canada's objective of protecting critical infrastructure from cyber-attacks and other threats.
However, Bill C-26 in its current form raises some concerns. We have outlined our concerns and proposed amendments to the legislation in a written submission to the standing committee. I will mention a few of them, all of which pertain to part 1 of Bill C-26 and the proposed amendments to the Telecommunications Act.
First, the bill gives the minister very broad order-making powers that lack appropriate checks and balances. Given the extremely broad scope and potential impact of these powers, the proposed legislation should be amended to impose conditions on exercising them. Specifically, orders should not only be necessary in the opinion of the minister but also reasonably necessary—in other words, proportionate to the potential harm of the security risk and reasonable in the circumstances. The legislation should also require that orders be made only after the minister has consulted with prescribed experts to ensure they are proportionate to the risk posed, have a limited impact on service availability and are economically and operationally feasible for affected service providers.
Second, while orders made under the bill are subject to judicial review, the legislation provides that a judge can base his or her decision on evidence the applicant is not allowed to see and therefore cannot challenge. This process makes no effort to provide for alternative means of testing the government's evidence, including the appointment of a special advocate with the appropriate level of security clearance.
Third, Bill C-26 does not include a due diligence defence for alleged violations of orders made pursuant to the proposed new sections of the Telecommunications Act, even though a defence of due diligence is available for other violations of the act, as well as for violations of orders by others under the rest of Bill C-26. The absence of a due diligence defence is even more striking given that the legislation seeks to introduce significant monetary penalties. Telecommunications providers should have the right, as afforded to others under Bill C-26, to avail themselves of a due diligence defence in appropriate circumstances by demonstrating they took all reasonable care in the circumstances to avoid the alleged violation.
Lastly, part 1 of Bill C-26 should be amended to make clear that compensation may, at the discretion of the government, be awarded for any financial expenditures, losses and costs resulting from complying with an order.
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to share our views on this key issue. We look forward to answering your questions.