Transport Committee on May 11th, 2010

[Chantal Bernier]

The privacy impact assessment from DHS shows a list of what will be transmitted, and it does not include that. It includes name, date of birth, gender, document number—

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

But this information is already available. It is available to customs officials at land borders right across, so why wouldn't it be part of that secure list?

[Chantal Bernier]

Because the secure flight is strictly intended for airline security. Therefore, all they ask for is the information they feel is relevant to that. As I said, that's the identification plus itinerary and passport number—

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

So you're very comfortable that they're not going to go beyond the information they're asking for, the information they already have.

[Chantal Bernier]

No, I wouldn't say that. I'm saying that, technically, Secure Flight asks for very specific information. It doesn't include, for example, criminal records, but that does not mean that the American authorities would not check—

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

They have that already.

[Chantal Bernier]

Exactly. I'm simply answering what Secure Flight is requiring.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

I have one minute.

With the body scanners, you said there was a threat assessment provided to you about how these body scanners were going to deal with this particular threat. There was a very comprehensive report. Is that a report that would be available to this committee?

[Chantal Bernier]

No, that's not exactly.... I may have misspoken. What I said is that we have challenged Transport Canada as well as CATSA as to why they felt this was necessary. What they did is present to us how they had come to that conclusion, on the basis of what information, and so on.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Is that presentation available?

[Chantal Bernier]

It was an oral presentation, but—

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

So we don't have anything written down about why body scanners are so important?

[Chantal Bernier]

You may want to ask them. They may very well have documents in that regard.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

But you didn't think it was necessary to do an assessment to actually have something presented to you in terms of statistical analysis or anything like that in terms of threat assessment vis-à-vis privacy?

[Chantal Bernier]

What we did was ask them to show us how they had come to that conclusion. We're in the interesting situation where we cannot second-guess them, and yet we have to hold them accountable. What we asked them to show is that they have done due diligence in ensuring that the measure they are putting forward is indeed based on a true, sound threat assessment. That's what they did.

They explained to us that they had sound intelligence--credible, sound intelligence--that the highest threat was a passenger-borne non-metal explosive. That was on October 6, 2009. Our offices worked together at my level and at the commissioner's level. We also had specific information on that. Therefore, we came to the conclusion they had done their due diligence.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you.

Mr. Jean.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Mr. Chair, I will be sharing my time with Ms. Brown.

First of all, thank you very much for your attendance today.

I want to let you know that there is another group of people out there, and I'm one of them. I'm from northern Alberta, so maybe that sets me aside a bit from normal Canadians. But I look at the passenger protect program over here and the trusted traveller program over here, and we are working from both ends to come to the middle. I don't want to talk about the passenger protect program; I want to talk about the trusted traveller program.

Why I say there are different people out there is that I travel a lot. I'm a “Super Elite” member on Air Canada. I fly back and forth to Fort McMurray. I've travelled the world. I like travelling. I'm totally prepared to let the U.S. or any government, any democracy, have any amount of information they want on me--just don't make me wait in line. That's my position.

I don't want to wait in line. I'm tired of lineups. I wait in lines all the time. I don't have to wait in line to get into this place. I don't have to go through any security to be here with all the cabinet ministers and all the MPs, but I have to wait in Ottawa for half an hour, and sometimes for an hour, as we heard from our friend Mr. Volpe, at Lester B. Pearson airport. It's a long time.

I want to talk very briefly about privileges and the right or the privilege--because we don't have a right to fly. We do have rights under the charter, but the right to fly is not one of them, if I can say this. I'm a lawyer by background, so I understand that the Supreme Court has said there's no right to drive. It's a privilege to drive, and that's why you have to get a licence, and that licence can be taken away at the whim of the state.

It's the same with flying. It's the same with going through our airports. There's no right to go through our airports and there's no right to fly, just like there's no right to go over American airspace. It's a privilege for Canadians to be able to fly our planes over American airspace, and it's a privilege for us to drive.

From my perspective, you can just take my information and keep it as long as you want, a hundred years if you want, because I'll be gone by then. I don't care as long as it's not a VISA number or my e-mail, because I don't want to be contacted either. Just take my information and let me go through.

What do you say to that?

[Chantal Bernier]

What we say is that should such a program be put to us we would do the same as we have done, for example, on the body scanners. We would require a privacy impact assessment: a full explanation of why you need this measure, why it would be helpful, and how privacy would be protected. And we would review it in that same fashion. That kind of program would in fact need to have a privacy impact assessment, just like the body scanners did, for example--

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I'm sure it would. But if I may, Ms. Bernier, I don't care.

[Chantal Bernier]

--and we would review it.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

To be blunt, I don't care about my privacy as long as I don't have to wait in line.

[Chantal Bernier]

Well, then, that would be one of the factors we would definitely consider: consent. Because what you are speaking about could be based on consent. For example, there's NEXUS, where you actually pay and you give your consent to have some private information given for the privilege, as you say, to go faster. That certainly would attenuate the privacy invasion.

However, I would think that if such a program were to be put in place, it would be subject to Treasury Board Secretariat's policy for a privacy impact assessment.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Of course.

I just want to say about the body scanners, if I may, that as a person who practised criminal law in Fort McMurray for 11 years, I've never seen anything more intrusive than a body search. I think they're repugnant. I don't think they should be allowed by anybody, unless safety is a real concern. So these body scanners, from my perspective, are a great advancement forward for personal rights and personal security. Quite frankly, I think they're good. After saying that....

Ms. Brown.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, I just need to address a comment that Mr. Volpe made earlier about the length of time for information that is collected. My great-grandmother was 104 and her sister was 110, so I think I have longevity on my side. I may be hit by a House of Commons bus this afternoon, but my information may be around for a long time too.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

All the more reason to eliminate it--