Evidence of meeting #16 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 40th Parliament, 3rd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was airports.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Conservative
Lois Brown Conservative Newmarket—Aurora, ON
Ms. Bernier, thank you for the comments about the trusted traveller program. I'd like to pursue that just a little bit more if we may.
I think what we've heard in all of the presentations around this discussion of airport security is that we need to develop a seamless process. Not only is that important for a passenger's sense of well-being, which is so important, but it's also important for the productivity of our nation. All of that has to be taken into consideration.
My question comes in around other areas where information is being attracted by persons who are using it for ill, where people have already given their personal information on forums like Twitter and Facebook. I know you identify that there are technological threats.
When I have consensually given my information to NEXUS and I've made my application, I do not find that intrusive. What kind of information do you think is appropriate for us to be asking for? Do you have comments on that? What direction would you give the government on how we collect that and what we collect?
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
What we collect is strictly what is necessary to fulfill the objectives of the program. That's the framework. We collect not one piece of information more than what is actually needed to fulfill those objectives.
Once you have collected the information, you must ensure that it is kept absolutely secure, which is the step about data protection. That would be our stance when reviewing, for example, a trusted traveller program.
Conservative
Lois Brown Conservative Newmarket—Aurora, ON
We are looking at engaging more and more people in the NEXUS program because that is going to provide efficiencies in the system. People have chosen to go through that program. They've chosen to give their information to the government, and the government has said that it will provide the level of security necessary to ensure that the information is not going anywhere else.
How does a person then ensure that their information has not been taken from another source and yet NEXUS is accused? We know that there are multiple areas for people who are phishing on the Internet to find out information about individuals: where does that balance come in?
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Our office does audits, as we did for the passenger protect program, precisely for that reason. As I stated earlier, first and foremost, we will require justification for the invasion of privacy. Why do you need this information? How is it proportionate to your objective?
Once you have collected this information, we will look into whether the government protects it absolutely securely. We all know that the government is the greatest holder of personal information and the holder of the most sensitive personal information. Therefore, there cannot be a leak. That is why we exercise our audit functions to regularly check in and look at how the technological infrastructure is protecting personal information.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will share my time with Mr. Volpe.
Thank you, Madame Bernier and Mr. Baggaley.
I'm carrying a NEXUS card. Even though it's issued by U.S. authorities, I'm a Canadian citizen. Do you support a program like NEXUS to fast-track security clearance for frequent travellers?
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
First of all, we would leave it in the hands of the aviation security authorities to come up with a program. They would submit to us a privacy impact assessment, which is an analysis of how their program ensures a proper balance with privacy. Our function would be to review that privacy impact assessment and make recommendations, as appropriate.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
That program is already in effect at the Ottawa international airport. They have a sign displayed that says if you are a NEXUS cardholder you go through this line, even though it takes longer than the other lineup.
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Yes, but I understood that.... Well, perhaps Mr. Baggaley can speak to that. I thought you were...of the new program.
Strategic Policy Advisor, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Well, yes, but let's just make sure that we're all clear here that what a NEXUS card allows you to do is get through customs and immigration when you're returning to Canada or when you're entering the United States.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
No, no. It's different. If you go to the Ottawa airport today, you will see a lineup and a sign that says that if you are a NEXUS cardholder, you come through this security line, even though it takes twice as long as going through the other lineup.
Strategic Policy Advisor, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
And that's because in the Ottawa airport the United States has established a pre-clearance area. So that's an exception, where that's a trusted traveller program that will get you through U.S. customs and immigration more quickly.
In terms of whether we would support a trusted traveller program to get through security more quickly to fly from Ottawa to Toronto, we don't take a position on whether that should be introduced. If a decision were made to introduce it, then, as Ms. Bernier suggested, we would look at what measures were in place to minimize the collection of information and to ensure that the information was protected if that program was put in place.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
I have a short question and then I'll pass this to Mr. Volpe.
Do you have any concerns about the Israeli style of behaviour security programs?
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
First of all, we have already been told that should such a program be instituted in Canada, it would be submitted to us with a privacy impact assessment. We would therefore look at how it's built according to Canadian law for the protection of the right to privacy.
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
Thank you.
Madame Bernier, you probably won't have any trouble with the government. We've already heard a couple of government members say that privacy issues are secondary to them as long as security is first. It's amazing, because one would have expected that an ideological position on the part of the members opposite might have strengthened their desire to protect individual rights.
On that issue, when the government put in a passenger protected program—and I see this is noted in one of your recommendations—they neglected to establish a mechanism for taking people off the no-fly list once they are on it. So while you focus on the official who is responsible for putting names on the list and delisting people, the fact of the matter is that the Minister of Transport is the only one who can take your name off the list. And he's not asking anybody at the Department of Homeland Security to take your name off the list, because he can't.
So what kind of privacy impact assessment can you possibly provide them when they decide--if they do--to use the Israeli system, which is predicated on knowing who everybody is who is actually going to go through Ben Gurion? It's not an impossible task, given that the population of Israel is less than that of the GTA and Toronto. Do a roll call and you'll find out who's not acceptable.
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
We can only do the review of privacy impact assessments of Canadian government measures. Here, on Secure Flight, we're going further, because even though it is not within our jurisdiction, we feel that the rights of Canadians will be affected and, therefore, that Canada must do all it can to minimize that impact.
But you correctly say that we do not have a function of reviewing privacy impact assessments of a foreign country. We read and analyzed the privacy impact assessment provided by the Department of Homeland Security, but that was simply for us to truly understand the scope of the impact on Canadians. Unfortunately, we do not have any jurisdiction to effect change in that regard.
Bloc
Roger Gaudet Bloc Montcalm, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
You might not like my question, but I will ask it anyway.
Is the office of the commissioner proactive or reactive?
I know that you conducted an audit in the fall of 2009.
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
I would say that we are proactive and reactive, depending on what it is we need to do. As far as audits are concerned, we are proactive. We decide to conduct an audit based on any risk we have identified. We decided to conduct an audit of the passenger protect program because we felt it posed certain risks to people's privacy.
Bloc
Roger Gaudet Bloc Montcalm, QC
Why did you not discuss the passenger protect program with CATSA or Transport Canada? In that case, you were not proactive. You seem to be proactive only when the time comes to conduct an audit.
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
I have to say that I was not around when the passenger protect program was brought in, but I was there when the full body scanners were approved. In fact, we did sit down with them and have discussions. We had a document to evaluate issues related to privacy. Indeed, if you are interested, our response letter is up on our Web site. So you can see for yourself what really happened.
However, it is quite clear that we are not the ones who developed the passenger protect program. We are not responsible for it. Our responsibility is to make sure that, when a program is developed, it does not violate people's privacy. That is why we receive drafts of programs. We receive the evaluation conducted by the department as far as privacy is concerned, and then we make recommendations to ensure that people's fundamental rights to privacy are respected. So all we do is make recommendations.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Merci.
I'm sorry, but we are out of time.
Thank you to our guests for being here today. We look forward to further input as we move forward.
As a notice to committee members, on Thursday we're doing Bill C-442, the Holocaust bill, so if you do have any amendments or concerns, please contact Bonnie.
With that, Mr. Jean.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
I'm just wondering, after Mr. Volpe's comment, does that mean he knows everybody in the GTA?