Public Safety committee  Not on that point, no.

Public Safety committee  I do. Every day I'm concerned about the protection of my privacy, particularly working in the field of human rights. Never have I woken up in the morning and thought to myself that I hope I don't die in a terrorist attack today.

Public Safety committee  May I make a final point about a question that was previously raised regarding security in a digital age? I think one of the key questions that needs to be raised is on what the role of business is here. In considering that, you may want to take a look at John Ruggie's protect,

Public Safety committee  I was wondering if you could be a little more specific about part one of your question.

Public Safety committee  The short answer is yes, absolutely. The government needs to demonstrate that any action taken is reasonable and proportionate, particularly when it results in an infringement on charter rights. It must also demonstrate that the impact of more intrusive measures will result in a

Public Safety committee  One point I'd like to make is that there is another reason that information sharing, even with our close allies, is very problematic. My view is that these allies are not accountable to our voters, unlike our politicians here, who represent the best interests of Canadians. That i

Public Safety committee  That also raises the issue of losing control over what other states do with the information that we share with them, as we saw in the Arar case. Yes, we're maintaining a strong partnership with the United States in doing so, but we also risk having that information misused once

Public Safety committee  Only when it's particularly intrusive.

Public Safety committee  Well, that's if it goes beyond the scope of collecting metadata and there isn't a clear rationale for why the data is being collected, as in the likelihood that the individual is actually a terrorist or will commit a terrorist offence being very low, and when it would extend to a

Public Safety committee  All I would like to say on that point is that there is no internationally uniform definition of terrorism. That is problematic, because if we are introducing such significant limitations on fundamental human rights and freedoms and we don't even know what the definition of terror

Public Safety committee  I'll read very quickly. Number one, clearly define the scope of activities that constitute a “security threat to Canada” under section 2 of the SCISA, as well as “advocacy, protest, dissent and artistic expression”, which are excluded from the scope of the act. Two, strike out

Public Safety committee  I apologize. The right to privacy is protected under article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Canada is a state party. Though there is no equivalent protection found under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the right to privacy i

Public Safety committee  Mr. Chair and honourable committee members, thank you for the opportunity to speak with you regarding Canada's national security framework. At this point, I would like to commend the Liberal government for launching a public consultation to inform legal, policy, regulatory, and