Evidence of meeting #34 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 privacy.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:45 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
I don't know, but I would presume that American government national security transmission goes to the highest standard of encryption available, which T.J. Maxx consciously decided not to do.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
But they've changed their mind now, haven't they?
12:45 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Yes.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
You are active with the Canadian Bar Association. Does that make you a lawyer?
12:45 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Yes.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
And I notice you kept referring to your counsel as Daniel Caron. Is that Dr. Daniel Caron?
12:45 p.m.
Legal Counsel, Legal Services, Policy and Parliamentary Affairs Branch, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
No.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
12:45 p.m.
Legal Counsel, Legal Services, Policy and Parliamentary Affairs Branch, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
I don't know. I'm sure there are a lot of Daniel Carons.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Well, you're a very famous author and teacher, according to my information here, so congratulations on that.
12:45 p.m.
Legal Counsel, Legal Services, Policy and Parliamentary Affairs Branch, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
All right. I'll take it.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
I was curious about your reference to the United States and to foreigners coming into the country.
My understanding of the law in the United States is that indeed once a foreigner comes into the United States, they are afforded the same protection as a citizen--in fact, identical protection and the same protection. So wouldn't it be fair to say that a Canadian landing in the United States or coming into American space would have exactly the same protections as Americans and the same redress? I was a personal injury lawyer, so I understand the negligence aspect of what Mr. Mayes was suggesting. Wouldn't they be afforded the exact same protections as an American, and in fact the same ability to sue if their information was shared with others?
12:45 p.m.
Legal Counsel, Legal Services, Policy and Parliamentary Affairs Branch, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
I'm just talking about the application of the U.S. Privacy Act and the rights that are contained under the act, and that generally does not apply to visitors or aliens.
With respect to the secure flight program overseen by the Department of Homeland Security, because they have exempted a number of sections of the Privacy Act to apply to the secure flight program, neither Americans nor Canadians, nor other visitors or aliens, will benefit from certain protections of the U.S. Privacy Act. And although U.S. citizens would have a right to judicially review certain decisions of the DHS, Canadian citizens would not have the ability to do so.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
12:45 p.m.
Legal Counsel, Legal Services, Policy and Parliamentary Affairs Branch, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
That's how I understand it.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
I'd appreciate a follow-up in relation to that, because that's very important. That is not my information and that's not my understanding of the law. In fact, I do understand they have actually exempted some of those parts of the privacy laws in the United States, but my understanding is we are afforded exactly the same protection under those laws that a U.S. citizen would have. So I'd appreciate that follow-up.
Those are all my questions. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Thank you.
If I may, I just have a follow-up question. One of the challenges we're seeing right now and I think most MPs are probably hearing about from constituents is the background checks. What they're asking these people to provide is their name, their sex, and their date of birth, which is basically what we're talking about here. I think the reason they're asking for the date of birth is that people can change their names; it's tougher to change your date of birth. We're actually finding people who are caught up in that, in the sense that they have the same birth date and same year as a felon. So it creates a challenge.
Is that not similar to what we're seeing with the request from the Americans to fly over their airspace? Is that not just a very simple way of identifying people, or at least shredding the unnecessary follow-ups that take place? If you can match a birth date and the year, that may well be worth exploring a little further to identify who the person really is. Is that not what they're asking for in a similar vein?
12:45 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Again, I'm not privy to how the United States runs its security program, but my understanding is that it's not just to see who's an immediate threat, but to try to prevent threats by looking at patterns of people who may be overflying the United States. For example, one thing that seems to come out is that before someone does something drastic, they make several dry runs at it to check out the defence system. So I think the wish to identify those flying over their airspace is related to that, to see how to prevent those studying what they can do to attack American national security from the air.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
But if you're obligated to provide that birth date and year, and that attaches you to someone with a criminal record, they're not going to let you fly once to do a test run, are they?
12:50 p.m.
Privacy Commissioner, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Well, if they're on a commercial airline, then they'll have all the other elements, and they'll probably then run it against the address and perhaps go back into other databases. Maybe you have done this before, prior to the overflight program, so they would have other information about you and could distinguish between you and the same person with your name but who is in fact a felon.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Thank you.
With that, I thank our guests for being here today.
On Tuesday we commence again. I would ask everybody to pay attention to the memos that we will send out over the next day or so in regard to a subcommittee meeting and planning for future meetings outside of our regularly scheduled meetings.
The meeting is adjourned.