Public Safety Committee on Feb. 26th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Do I have a mover for G‑4?

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, La Prairie—Atateken, QC]

Yes. This amendment ensures that directives made under the bill cannot be used to order that an encrypted private communication be decoded. I think this amendment is in line with the wishes of all the members here. So I don't think it should be an issue.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Okay.

Shall G‑4 carry?

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Let's move on to CPC‑44.

Is amendment CPC-44 moved?

MP Lloyd.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Parkland, AB]

Yes, I move the amendment.

I would like to ask the officials for their reflection on the amendment in relation to the privacy rights of Canadians.

[Colin MacSween]

We have no additional considerations to offer with this amendment. It's clearly in line with the policy intent of the bill. I don't have much to say beyond that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Thank you.

Is CPC-44 adopted?

(Amendment agreed to)

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Let's move on to BQ‑11.

Would someone like to move that amendment?

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

No.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

There's no desire to move BQ‑11, which takes us to G‑5.

Would someone like to move that amendment?

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, La Prairie—Atateken, QC]

I do.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Mr. Ramsay, the floor is yours.

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, La Prairie—Atateken, QC]

Amendment G‑5 simply proposes a proactive change that seeks to ensure that the Governor in Council takes into account the need for proportionality before issuing a cyber security directive. It establishes a legal standard for review and provides additional assurance that directives will be used only to protect critical cyber systems. So this amendment provides greater assurance.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay.

Seeing no discussion, shall G‑5 carry?

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

We're now moving on to NDP‑12, which is deemed moved.

Is there any debate on NDP‑12?

Mr. Lloyd, the floor is yours.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Parkland, AB]

I'll admit that this was a bit of a confusing motion for me. I'd like to ask the officials to provide some clarity on what the impact would be.

[Colin MacSween]

Simply stated, the amendment would remove the prohibition against disclosing the fact that a cybersecurity direction was issued to a designated operator and make the associated change in the “Disclosure—when allowed” section. In layman's terms, it would allow a designated operator to indicate that they were subject to a cybersecurity direction.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Thank you.

Is NDP-12 adopted?

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

We will move to BQ-12.

Is BQ‑12 moved?

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

No, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Okay, thank you.

We're now going to move on to CPC‑45.

Is CPC-45 being moved?

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Parkland, AB]

Yes, I'd like to move this amendment.

We're seeking to create a standard for information disclosure or collection. I'd like to ask the officials to provide some feedback on that.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Mr. Ramsay, you have the floor.

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, La Prairie—Atateken, QC]

Mr. Chair, I, too, would like to hear the experts' opinion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Ms. Gibson, you have the floor.

[Kelly-Anne Gibson, Director, National Cyber Security Directorate, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I think there may be some unintended consequences with this particular amendment. If the purpose of the amendment is to ensure that there are protections in place for personal information, I would highlight that there's already a reliance on the Privacy Act, which has a definition of personal information and rules around its use, which this act relies on.

I would highlight that the CSE Act also has provisions for the protection of personal information. The concern with the way this is worded is that it could unintentionally inhibit CSE from using the information for its lawful mandate. In practical terms, it could affect CSE's ability to provide support, through its voluntary program, to Canadian operators.

I think that's something you may wish to consider as part of this amendment.