Evidence of meeting #37 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 airlines.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My question is to Mr. Salter, Mr. Gardee, and of course Mr. Lennox as well.
The way we see it right now, we are already transmitting the data, as most of the people have said, either directly or indirectly. Now the U.S. is asking for this Bill C-42. What should be the minimum amount of data required for security purposes? That's all I would like to know from you today.
November 30th, 2010 / 12:10 p.m.
Associate Professor, School of Political Studies, University of Ottawa
The API data, the advance passenger information that includes name, date of birth, and gender, is sufficient for the American secure flight program. I agree with the longer-term consequences that Mr. Hasbrouck speaks of, but that's the minimum that's required.
Executive Director, Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations
We would agree that the secure flight program only requires those three pieces of information. What we would be recommending is that Transport Canada work with the airlines to avoid excessive disclosures of personal information. Currently the Aeronautics Act allows the Governor in Council to make regulations respecting the type or class of information that can be provided to other countries.
Vice-President, Corporate Affairs and Communications, Greater Toronto Airports Authority
I'm afraid that as the airport authorities do not collect data like this, I'm not very equipped to answer that question. I would defer to my colleagues here, who are suggesting API information, but I'm afraid it's not information that we collect, so I'm unfortunately not able to speak.
Airline Reservation Data Expert, The Liberty Coalition
I don't think, if I were in your place as part of your House, or if I were a Canadian traveller, that I'd want any of these data transferred to the U.S. unless and until the U.S. is party to a binding treaty or makes substantial changes to its laws. I think it is quite clear that the secure flight program is in violation of U.S. treaty obligations under article 12 of the ICCPR and should be completely withdrawn. We have argued this point to the U.S. government, but because of the U.S. reservations we are unable to raise this point in U.S. courts,
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
Quite a few constituents of mine have come to me because they face challenges when they go through the Canadian airport security process. Could you tell me some of the special challenges that Muslims or other minorities face from security guards these days?
Executive Director, Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations
Some of these challenges have been documented in the high-profile cases, but some of the information collected through the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group's Clearinghouse project clearly shows, from the people who have been responding, that they face various difficulties and delays. There is secondary screening, and so forth, and they could even have to change their travel plans or have their travel plans cancelled and not be able to travel on flights, for example, from Halifax to Toronto. These are challenges that they face.
Liberal
Liberal
Gerry Byrne Liberal Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This is to Mr. Edward Hasbrouck.
The American experience can indeed be helpful to us. You indicated in your opening remarks your fear that significant data information--everything from hotel reservations to the particulars therein--will be available and will be held as part of a profile.
Here is the question I have for you, sir. We're told that the default position, which we're led to understand is a solid one, is that information will be held for a length of time. There are three categories. In one it's assessed as “no threat determined”, and the information is immediately jettisoned; if there is some standard of threat, it is held for up to seven days; and if there's a defined threat, an actual terrorist identification, it's held for up to 99 years.
Are you suggesting to us, based on the American experience, that we should not have confidence in that default administrative protocol, a protocol not bound in legislation but in administrative practice? Is that what you're telling us?
Airline Reservation Data Expert, The Liberty Coalition
Yes, that's right. The very limited and censored dossiers that we have been able to obtain for U.S. citizens contain complete PNRs going back years, even when there is absolutely no indication whatsoever that any threat was found, although of course the threat assessments and profiles themselves have, in all cases, been kept secret from the people against whom they're being used. Even in cases where there's absolutely no reason to suspect the least threat, we see those complete PNRs routinely being kept for years. Whatever assurances have been offered are entirely non-binding at this point.
Bloc
Roger Gaudet Bloc Montcalm, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My question is to Mr. Lennox.
Personal information is sent to airlines. Are these companies working for the FBI or the CIA? What do they do with this information?
Vice-President, Corporate Affairs and Communications, Greater Toronto Airports Authority
I would have to defer to Mr. Salter on this one. As I said, the airport authority is not actually the one collecting or remitting airport data, so I would have to defer to someone else.
Mr. Salter, is that...?
Associate Professor, School of Political Studies, University of Ottawa
Can you please repeat the question?
Bloc
Roger Gaudet Bloc Montcalm, QC
The question is simple. We have been talking about this matter for several weeks. Why do airlines keep this information instead of the FBI or the CIA? This is what I cannot understand.
The airlines seem to be acting as if they were the FBI or the CIA. Why do they keep this information? On 9/11, it was four U.S. airliners that crashed. So can you explain to me why airlines instead of the FBI or the CIA are collecting and keeping this information? The airlines get the information and then pass them on. It is like a wheel.
I cannot understand why the airlines keep this information when they are not responsible for security.
Associate Professor, School of Political Studies, University of Ottawa
I fully agree with you and share your concern about the privatization of this government responsibility.
to gather up or collect security data,
and to do security analyses and policing.
I think Transport Canada created the list so that when airlines get a message from the ministry about a security threat, they can immediately transfer the file to Transport Canada. I think this is an excellent process.
I think governments see these data as an opportunity to do more surveillance, so I think you're right to be suspicious. I think the government should own up and take its own job, as it were.
Bloc
Roger Gaudet Bloc Montcalm, QC
I think the information should go to qualified people. I do not know of any airline that is qualified in the classification of people and that can say that an individual is or is not dangerous. The CIA has the capacity to do these things. I cannot imagine why anyone would agree to let an airline have and keep all this information and perhaps use it for commercial purposes.
You say we are going to have a good bill. I am definitely not sure about that.
Airline Reservation Data Expert, The Liberty Coalition
If I might comment on that, there is a great interest from the airline companies in using the data for commercial and marketing and data mining purposes.
That was made very clear to me a couple of years ago when I was at an International Civil Aviation Organization seminar in Montreal on this question. At this seminar the representative of IATA, the airline trade association, came before the assembled governmental representatives and said that they, as airlines, would be happy to collect whatever data governments would like them to collect as long as, one, they were reimbursed for their costs in collecting it, and two, having passed the data on to government, they got a free ride to keep and use the data themselves for commercial and marketing purposes.
There is, in fact, at least in the U.S., an entire industry of third party data mining and data analysis companies that look at these PNR data for a variety of commercial, marketing, and operational purposes for the airlines.
Vice-President, Corporate Affairs and Communications, Greater Toronto Airports Authority
Let me intrude for a moment.
The air carriers collect the information, and I agree with you that they, like a whole host of companies, use the data they collect for their marketing purposes, but the point we're talking about is that at least in Canada the data they are collecting can only be shared with anybody else provided they get the consent of whoever is providing it.
The range of information that an air carrier is going to generate from an individual passenger that is relevant to the air carrier's purposes is presumably legion. It goes right from how big they want to make their aircraft to the range of the seat, etc. The issue we're talking about here is that it's the air carrier that actually collects the API—they're required to by statute—and that it is therefore they who have to share it with the Americans, but we have to be careful. Some information that air carriers will be using for their own purposes is protected under Canadian law by PIPEDA. The question is what exemptions we are going to grant for that information, and that is an excruciatingly difficult question. I completely agree with that.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Merci, Monsieur Gaudet.
Mr. Gaudet, I'm sorry, but your time's up.
Go ahead, Mr. Jean.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, witnesses. I'll be sharing my time with Ms. Brown.
I do want to do a very quick recap, if I may. Let me know at the end of it if I'm wrong.
The airlines collect two kinds of data, the API and the PNR. The PNR number is included in the API. The PNR data, for the most part, consist of commercial information that you would give an air carrier. I would submit that it's fair to say the U.S. is collecting these data to protect their borders and citizens and that there's no nefarious intention in the collection of those data. I think most people would agree. That is, of course, disputable and debatable, and some don't naturally see that as an issue.
Even if we do restrict all the PNR data, I also understand that because the PNR number is on the API, under the Patriot Act--I understand it's under the Patriot Act--the U.S. has the legal right to access the PNR data without a warrant and without any restriction in the United States, and they already do. Am I correct, pretty much, so far?