Public Safety Committee on May 7th, 2026

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Parkland, AB]

Thank you.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here.

Madame Deschamps, were you consulted in the drafting of this legislation?

[Marie Deschamps]

I understand that this question was posed to the minister.

I have been meeting with the minister, according to the statute, once a year. When we met in December for our yearly meeting, Bill C-22 did not come up.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Parkland, AB]

Philosophically, one reason Canada is such a great country is precisely because of the accountability we have—redundant levels of accountability. That's why I'm quite shocked that this is the second iteration of this legislation. We had Bill C-2 and now we have Bill C-22. The basic accountability things you talked about, like review capabilities, are not included. I'm highly frustrated given the seriousness of the issues this legislation seeks to address. It's things like child sexual exploitation, yet basic accountability measures like review are not being included.

Could you talk about the importance of why NSIRA should be involved in the review process?

[Marie Deschamps]

At NSIRA, we regularly receive information about authorizations, and we don't just ignore it. We integrate it into the bulk of our knowledge of the operations agencies are conducting. With that knowledge, we are building the amount of information we need to plan our activities and get to a better understanding of how agencies are operating.

It's very important that, specifically with this bill, we get the information as early as possible. That moment in time would be the minute the intelligence commissioner issues his approval.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Parkland, AB]

Thank you. I sincerely hope we can get amendments like the ones you proposed discussed here more fulsomely. I'm very frustrated that this wasn't included in the legislation by the Minister of Public Safety in the first place.

Ms. Curran, I brought this up with another witness. Does Meta advertise its privacy controls to its consumers?

[Rachel Curran]

We do, yes. We have a transparency centre that outlines all of our privacy policies. We implement, essentially, privacy by design into all of our products, and we make very clear to all users what these policies are.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Parkland, AB]

If you were to receive a secret ministerial order to install a device or create a capability so that law enforcement could circumvent those advertised privacy controls, how would you be able to tell your users that those things you're advertising are no longer allowable?

[Rachel Curran]

We wouldn't be, and this is a major issue.

I'm going to let my colleague Robyn get into this in more detail, because this is an important question.

[Robyn Greene, Director, Privacy and Public Policy, Meta Platforms Inc.]

Thank you so much for putting this question forward.

As drafted, the bill has a blanket secrecy provision that would essentially prevent us from being able to explain to our users that these changes were made and, if discovered, why they were made. This latter part is really important because, ultimately, our services are available around the world. This means there are security researchers, technical experts and journalists around the world who regularly decompile and reverse-engineer our products. Sometimes it's because they're trying to look for vulnerabilities and help us shore up our systems through bug bounty programs. Sometimes it's because they're trying to see if they can get any information on what our next product or feature releases will be. This happens with all companies like ours.

Ultimately, these kinds of changes will be discovered. It's not a question of “if”. As Rachel was saying, when it comes to the exploitation of a vulnerability, discoverability is a question of “when”. Providers would then be in a really significant conflict because users would completely lose trust in the security and privacy protections of our products.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Parkland, AB]

I'm sorry to cut you off, but I have limited time.

Apple threatened to leave the United Kingdom because of its laws. Do you foresee major companies also possibly having to leave Canada because of this legislation, if it goes unamended?

[Robyn Greene]

I can't speak to what other companies will do, but I think there are a number of companies that have gone on record, stating clearly that they're not open—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Frank Caputo]

Thank you very much. I'm sorry, but I do have to cut you off there.

Next, we have Mr. Zuberi for five minutes, please.

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

I thank the witnesses for being here.

I'm so happy to see you in front of us today. I have a lot of respect for the work that you have done throughout your careers.

I will start with you, Mr. Noël. Over the years, I have come across your work with respect to security certificates and many other pieces of national security legislation, and I have a lot of respect for this.

You stated earlier that one of your key functions involves privacy, looking at privacy with respect to this legislation. Would you suggest that it would be at all helpful for the Privacy Commissioner to be involved in this legislation and this process?

[Simon Noël]

Not knowing exactly what is in the privacy law, I think he is already following the work I'm doing—through his personnel. I think he would be doing the same if it was the case. The distinction to be made between the Privacy Commissioner and me is this: I'm involved in the decision-making process; the Privacy Commissioner is not involved in any government decision.

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

I understand.

Currently, Canadians have a reasonable expectation of privacy. This legislation will shift that landscape. Can you explain how it would shift that landscape?

Can Canadians still expect to have a reasonable expectation of privacy, given the scope of this legislation?

[Simon Noël]

It's hard to guess what will be in the future. With the new era we're in, gone are the days of the telephone book that police organizations could go and consult. The Meta groups and the others control all of that information. The government is put in a position of trying to improve the system of investigation across Canada.

He is trying to establish a framework, an architecture to be able to do so.

I would suggest to you, sir, that Canadians, when they hear about pedophile issues and bank fraud, expect the system to adapt to the new era. Measures have to be undertaken. This is one proposal. Some people don't like part 2, but somebody at some point will have to decide how the data banks, essential to police organizations, will be used, and that's one example.

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

I know you've spoken about the duty of candour of CSIS and other agencies. I understand your current role is different from your role in the past, but, Madam Deschamps or Mr. Noël, if you have any comments about potential concerns around duty of candour or compliance by policing organizations and those that have the authorities.... Do you foresee any potential concerns?

[Simon Noël]

My past experience, as you have noted, has shown that I've had to call it as it is: a breach of duty of candour. In my present position, I have put the burden on both agencies to tell me, to brief me, on everything that they're going to present to me. If they don't tell me exactly what I should know or not know, they will pay for it, because a decision will not be granted.

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

I'll use the remainder of my time to plead to Meta that it please curate an environment online that is family-friendly—to be honest, not just one that is family-friendly but one that invites people to positively participate. As elected officials, we have so many comments on our social media that do not create environments that encourage positive discussion.

I just want to put that out there to you. Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Frank Caputo]

Thank you, Mr. Zuberi. You are out of time.

Mrs. DeBellefeuille, you have the floor for five minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I’m very glad to hear from you, Ms. Deschamps and Mr. Noël. I think you are the only francophones to have spoken in the four hours since the meeting began. So, that’s music to my ears. I wanted to tell you that.

Ms. Deschamps, it’s fair to say that the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency is a young organization. I think it’s been around for about six years. I feel like I’m the member encouraging my colleagues to learn more about the agency, because it’s still pretty unknown. By attending your briefings, I’ve come to realize just how important it is in terms of protection and oversight.

Regarding Bill C‑22, the minister does not seem to understand what you are asking for and what I am about to ask for, namely that the agency be notified. This is not a request for you to be involved in the decision-making process. We know that, under the bill, this is the job of the intelligence commissioner.

Could you explain to us why, in Australia or other countries, they have chosen to allow agencies equivalent to yours to provide superior protection and surveillance by granting them access to real-time information?

[Marie Deschamps]

Thank you for clarifying that. While listening to some of the testimony, I got the impression that there was some confusion regarding the respective roles of the agency and the office of the intelligence commissioner.

The intelligence commissioner grants prior authorization to carry out activities, and subsequently, the agencies proceed with their activities. We examine, for example, the governance of these agencies. Primarily, what we examine is the legality and reasonableness of their activities and whether they use their powers only when necessary. So, we examine the activities after they have been carried out by—

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

Ms. Deschamps, I’m sorry to interrupt you, but, as you know, I only have five minutes.

We understood that perfectly well when you gave your speech. What I want to understand, and what I want you to explain to people, is the fact that some countries have made a different choice than the one the government made in Bill C‑22. These countries notify their oversight body in real time of decisions made, for example, by an intelligence commissioner.

Canadians and Quebeckers would benefit from knowing that the agency is informed in real time, as this would reassure them. If the agency is informed a year after the fact, it requires a significant investigative effort. Furthermore, it does not necessarily have a large team that would allow it to quickly determine if the actions taken were not in compliance with the rules.

Did I understand that correctly?

[Marie Deschamps]

That is exactly right.

For example, in Australia, the turnaround time is only a few days. This saves the agencies that oversee intelligence activities from having to request information.

When you are forced to request information, it is not efficient for anyone. You have to do it on a case-by-case basis, with each of the agencies involved. It takes time for the body requesting the information, and it takes time for the agencies receiving the request. So, all we're looking for is greater efficiency. If we receive the information automatically, it avoids this entire process.

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

During his testimony, the minister said that if such an amendment were proposed, he might disagree somewhat. From what I understand, he feels that it would slow down the process. However, I believe that would not be the case, because the bulk of the work is done by the intelligence commissioner, who has a significant responsibility.

However, if you are there, aware of the situation, and keeping track of what is happening, it will allow you to be more effective and quicker in detecting non-compliant activities.

It seems obvious to me, Ms. Deschamps, that citizens and businesses are currently concerned. The agency would serve as an additional safeguard. Why not take advantage of it?