Information & Ethics committee  Fair point. It's probably different in degree rather than in kind. Mr. Kapoor, you can jump in. I don't want to use the word “relevant”, because we're debating that, but it was information that was properly within the remit of those agencies. I have no problem with agencies kee

Information & Ethics committee  I'm sorry.

Information & Ethics committee  That's my main concern there. In today's world, it's going to be tough, especially with a lot of data, but I think we need to be very nuanced in how we strike that balance while respecting the law. The key is going to be those thresholds. If we start to get the inputs right,

Information & Ethics committee  I concur with that. I agree that data per se, or data points—metadata and those sorts of things—can appear innocuous in some ways, but again it's the data mining. Because of the—

Information & Ethics committee  Exactly, and we certainly need to do that. I'm not suggesting in any way that our security agencies should not be doing that, because that's a useful way to identify threats and see patterns of criminality, but it's how we do it and how much information we're pulling. You're an

Information & Ethics committee  This goes to the root of my concern. The target of information that would reach the threshold is so broad that it's not even broad: it's open-ended. It's already set up to become something quite amorphous. At the lowest level, it could just be that they'll harvest all sorts of

Information & Ethics committee  I believe Commissioner O'Connor mentioned in his report that given the threats out there in the geopolitics of the world, obviously Muslims are implicated. That's not the right word, but you know what I mean. They're possibly seen as threats or whatnot, and because Muslims are on

Information & Ethics committee  When we look at Air India, we see that information wasn't shared, so I think we maybe need to look at new legislation—I mean, it's not in here—and some requirement for the agencies to work together. Mr. Kapoor has indicated they're doing that, but that's the type of thing we nee

Information & Ethics committee  I will echo my colleague here. We've called for it for a long time. A committee of parliamentarians is fine. I think Bill C-22 needs some reform, but it's a step in the right direction to give some political accountability and public accountability linked to all of you who are el

Information & Ethics committee  I'll try to be quick without going through the whole list. I think the amendments were essentially on lawful advocacy. I believe there was one other amendment, and it was to section 6, which says that information can be shared for any purpose. The complaint I had was that this

Information & Ethics committee  Yes.

Information & Ethics committee  I don't agree with that. The section says “any person”. My concern with this.... I would agree with the first statement, that this act purportedly encourages information sharing. You don't need section 9 to do that. I didn't have a chance to read her testimony, but the other p

Information & Ethics committee  —encourages that. I think civil servants should be acting in good faith all the time, and I think they should act within the law. When they step outside those bounds, the government should be held accountable. That would be my position.

Information & Ethics committee  The Privacy Commissioner plays an important role because of the privacy protections, but the Privacy Commissioner is not a national security expert. That department does not have that expertise. That would be one of the issues. Would they have the clearances to get at everything

Information & Ethics committee  I'll take a quick shot at it, and then I'll let Mr. Kapoor handle the rest. On the all-of-government sharing, clearly some government agencies may have information that would be useful in national security investigations. In terms of casting the net that wide, I don't know if a