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.
10:30 a.m.
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Indeed, we do not have much leeway. The Americans are a sovereign nation. As I said earlier, negotiation has its limits.
10:30 a.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Perfect.
My last question is about body scanners, which you have not addressed. A little earlier, a witness told us that body scanners had to be approved by your office, of course.
Have you analyzed this issue? I read the documents you sent us. Do the scanners pass the test?
10:30 a.m.
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
First, in 2008, we began working on body scanners with the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority, when it launched a pilot projet in Kelowna. In 2009, CATSA officials produced an evaluation of privacy-related issues once we knew that Canada intended to go ahead with body scanners. We conducted an extremely in-depth analysis of the necessity, proportionality and effectiveness of body scanners, as well as alternative options. CATSA and Transport Canada convinced us with their answers. They had conducted a very in-depth and serious risk analysis. They had also assured us that scanners would remain optional, not mandatory, and that complete discretion would be guaranteed. This meant that the agent who observed a passenger walking through the scanner would not be the one to see the passenger's image in the scanner. There is no correlation between the passenger's image and their identity. So the system is completely anonymous. The agent cannot transmit any images, by way of any type of technology, from the room where the images are seen. Of course, the other option is that the passenger can choose not to go through the scanner.
That being said, although we are happy with the cooperation from our partners and with the mechanisms to protect privacy, we believe that this is an ongoing issue. We intend to monitor the situation to ensure that there is a balance between the security measures being adopted and the protection of passengers' privacy.
10:30 a.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Thanks.
Welcome, Ms. Bernier. It's a pleasure to have you with us, as well as your colleague, Mr. Baggaley.
I have a question about the passenger protect program. There's one thing I'm curious about. What's the level of knowledge a passenger will have about their name on the protect program?
10:30 a.m.
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
A very low level, very low--
10:30 a.m.
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
It's a very opaque, secret piece of information. Of course—
10:35 a.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Don't you consider that to be a privacy violation, that someone whose name is on a list is not provided with that knowledge?
10:35 a.m.
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
We consider that there is a very cogent case made by the national security authorities for keeping that information secret.
10:35 a.m.
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Because, we understand, letting them know in advance that a person is such a suspect to be put on the list could impair some of our national security protection measures.
10:35 a.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
I don't see that as a cogent argument, but we'll leave that there.
Now, what about appeal?
10:35 a.m.
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
There is the redress mechanism. A person can go to the Office of Reconsideration and put their case forward. Initially, when the program was set up, our office publicly asked for a stronger redress mechanism. In fact, my colleague, Carman Baggaley, was there at the time.
Carman, would you like to expand on what we had asked for originally?
10:35 a.m.
Carman Baggaley Strategic Policy Advisor, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Yes, I'd be happy to.
When the passenger protect program was introduced, all of Canada's privacy commissioners, including the provincial commissioners, issued a resolution raising concerns about the program.
One of the things we asked for was a legislatively based redress program. If you look at the legislation and if you look at the regulations, there's no reference to the Office of Reconsideration. It's only mentioned in the statement that accompanies the regulations, so we asked for a legislatively based redress program that would actually be referred to in the legislation.
10:35 a.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
But you don't have it in these recommendations that you're giving us here today?
10:35 a.m.
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
No. What we focused on when we did the audit was whether Transport Canada was truly protecting the data adequately. That's what we focused on in that audit.
10:35 a.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
The Israelis, I understand, with their trusted traveller program, have a 1-800 number that you can simply call if you find that your name is on...or if you're rejected for the trusted traveller program. Would you say that it's important to establish processes that are easily accessible for people who are on these passenger protect programs so that they can find an easy passage in there? Is that part of what you were looking for?
10:35 a.m.
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
That is absolutely key, which is why we've made the recommendation.
10:35 a.m.
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
In fact, two of my recommendations—
10:35 a.m.
Assistant Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Exactly. Yes, you are absolutely right.
10:35 a.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
With respect to the secure flight program, as an MP I get these cases where people are trying to go across the border. I had one the other day regarding a guy with his family. He wasn't allowed across the border because of the zero tolerance policy and a minor drug offence in his youth.
Right now we share that information--we must share that information--with the United States about all our criminal offences. Will that be on the secure flight program? Is that part of their information that they will apply to Canadian travellers who are overflying the United States?
