Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 100 of 541
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
I see quorum. This meeting is now in order. This is the 12th meeting of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security.
We have before us Mr. Scott Jones, who is head of the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security, and who has appeared before this committee quite a number of times, I would say.
Before I ask you for your opening remarks, I just want to compliment you on your report. If the standard of a report is its accessibility, I think the report you produced is actually quite accessible, particularly for people such as us who are not particularly expert in the field. I want to thank you for that.
I also want to take note that it is an echo of the NSICOP report submitted by Mr. McGuinty, and there was a letter, which I hope was circulated to members after the last meeting.
With that, I welcome Mr. Jones for his seven minutes, and thank him again for being available to us.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Jones.
For the first six-minute round I have Madam Stubbs, Mr. Lightbound, Madame Michaud and Mr. Harris, in that order.
Madam Stubbs, please. You have six minutes.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Madam Stubbs.
Mr. Lightbound, please. You have six minutes.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
We're going to have to leave it there, Mr. Lightbound.
Ms. Michaud, you have six minutes.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Jones.
Mr. Harris, you have six minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
We're going to have to leave it there. Mr. Harris is over his time.
Mr. Motz, please. You have five minutes.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Motz, you've asked twice that an official of the government comment upon a decision of the cabinet. I think Mr. Jones declined to answer that question the first time. He should probably decline to answer that question a second time.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
You know I'm always generous with your time, Mr. Motz.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
He does very well, I have to say.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Motz, I'm stopping the clock.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Okay, I just want to be cautious about whatever questions, answers and deliberations about NSICOP. That is, in fact, a committee of parliamentarians who are sworn to a high level of secrecy, like you.
Mr. Glen Motz: Yes.
The Chair: I just want to make sure that you're going to stay within those guardrails. We know that guardrails are important to stay within these days.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
We'll have to leave it there, unfortunately. Mr. Motz, you are well over time.
Madam Khera, you have five minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Madam Khera.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
For two and a half minutes, we have Madame Michaud.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Unfortunately, I have to leave it there.
Mr. Harris, you have two and half minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Okay.
Thank you, Mr. Harris.
Mr. Van Popta, you have five minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Van Popta.
Mr. Van Popta has actually anticipated the question I would like to ask. Maybe we can get to it towards the end because I think it is a live issue.
With that, we have Mr. Iacono, for five minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Unfortunately, Mr. Iacono has gone over his five minutes. It is an important question. Perhaps you can circle back to it in another answer.
Mr. Kurek, you have five minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
We're going to have to leave it there, notwithstanding many efforts south of the border to change the vote tallies.
Madam Damoff, you have five minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Who knew Siri was out there in 1950?
Madame Michaud, you have two and a half minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Ms. Michaud.
Mr. Harris, you have two and a half minutes.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Harris.
Sorry, I cut you off a little early, Mr. Jones. Do you want to complete that sentence?
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Harris.
Earlier in your answer, I thought, you said there were something like two billion attacks a day.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Kurek, go ahead for six minutes.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Unfortunately, Mr. Kurek has gone way over his allocated time. If you can work your answer in some other way....
Madame Lambropoulos, are you up for a five-minute question, please?
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Madame Lambropoulos.
We have gone through three rounds, colleagues. We still have 20 minutes left. I believe that the Conservatives want Madam Stubbs to be next, but before we get to that round, I have a couple of questions that I would like to ask. Maybe the Liberals could indicate to the clerk whom they would like to have. I'm proposing five minutes for the Conservatives and the Liberals; then two and a half for the NDP and the Bloc; and then a further five minutes, which should take us to two minutes for the Liberals and two for the Conservatives. Please indicate to me whom you want to be the questioners.
I want to circle back on Mr. Van Popta's question on the allocation of risk.
A couple of years ago, we had Desjardins here to talk about a data breach. It was based upon what they called a “rogue” employee. What I didn't understand was how a customer of Desjardins would be put at substantial risk of their data going into the dark web, and yet, apparently, Desjardins had no liability for any harm that would happen to one of its customers. I just wonder if, in the context of your cybersecurity centre, that has been a discussion and, if so, where you think that discussion is going.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Jones, shouldn't the onus be on the financial institution? The financial institution has a lot more resources available to it to protect me than I have to protect myself. What I don't understand is why the onus shouldn't be on the financial service provider.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Well, I was inviting you to jump off the cliff there—
Voices: Oh, oh!
The Chair:—but it is something that has irritated me for a while now.
My second question has to do with passwords, and you're right to argue for passwords. What I don't understand is why all Canadians, when accessing their bank accounts, don't just simply have facial recognition technology. Isn't that the ultimate protection for passwords?
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
In the scaling of security, surely to goodness facial or thumbprint recognition technology is far more secure than whether my password is “123” or “321”.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Okay.
My final question—and I'm really straining the patience of my colleagues, but who cares—
Voices: Oh, oh!
The Chair: —has to do with an example of a friend of mine who made a commentary on several of the countries that you have named. He has a legitimate fear about threats, both cyber and other. He is a member of a diaspora community.
When he took a threat to the local police force, they said it was an RCMP matter. Then when he took it up to the RCMP, they said, “No, that's a CSIS matter.” When he tried to take the matter to CSIS, there was dead silence on the other end.
I think one of the reasons why the diaspora community doesn't report all of the threats out there is that there is no clear way to report these. Do you have advice for my friend, or for Canadians generally, who are actually threatened by foreign state actors, both on a cyber basis and on a physical basis?
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Jones. I'm going to have to end it there or else I'll be facing impeachment by my colleagues.
[Technical difficulty--Editor]
The Chair: Oh, it's nice to hear some music.
We're having a breach of our own security here.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
With that, we'll go to Madame Stubbs, for five minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Anything is possible.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
We're going to have to leave it there, Ms. Stubbs.
Who is the next Liberal questioner?
Madam Khera.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
You have 30 seconds.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
You still have 15 seconds.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Madame Michaud.
Ms. Michaud, you have two and a half minutes.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Sort of like an ISO marking for a company, is that what you have in mind?
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Okay.
Mr. Harris. for two and half minutes.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Harris.
We are technically past 5:30, but we are not being pressed by anybody. I had thought we had two questions still to go, one Liberal and one Conservative.
Do you want us to go past 5:30 or do you want to end it there?
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Okay.
Mr. Jones, on behalf of the committee I'm going to thank you. Your response in your report is done in an accessible way, which I think is 90% of the ball game, just to be able to explain how vulnerable we are both on a personal level and also as a nation, given all of the threats that appear in that regard.
Your security analysis has been very helpful to us. We appreciate your coming. I anticipate that we will be inviting you back.
With that, thank you, colleagues as well.
Just before I bring the gavel down, we have no indication from anybody at this point as to whether we will be able to meet next week. Stay tuned.
Thanks again.
The meeting is adjourned.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
I see quorum. This is meeting number 11 of the Public Safety and National Security Committee.
As witnesses, we have with us as today, Alain Babineau, a retired RCMP officer and social justice advocate.
We also welcome Mr. Patrick Roy and Mr. Éric Roger from the Sherbrooke Police Department.
I'm going to ask Mr. Babineau to start for seven minutes, followed by the officers from Sherbrooke.
It works a bit easier if at around the five-minute mark, you look up at me. I will give you an indication of the time. I don't wish to cut you off, but it will give you an opportunity to complete your remarks.
Mr. Babineau, you have the floor for seven minutes.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
With that I'll call on the Sherbrooke police service to present in whatever order it wishes.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Roy.
Have you finished?
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
We're already over seven minutes.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Excellent.
We're now on to the six-minute round of questions, starting with Mr. Motz, followed by Madame Lambropoulos, Madame Michaud and Mr. Harris.
Mr. Motz.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
His feed just froze there for a second.
This looks like a day for technical difficulties. In fact, I had a meeting earlier this morning that had to be cancelled because of technical difficulties.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
That's a bonus.
Glen, you're on mute.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Okay, you can wind back to where you were complimenting the inspector for his goaltending skills.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
We'll have to leave it there, Mr. Motz.
Thank you, Inspector Roy.
Madame Lambropoulos, you have six minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
We're going to have to leave the answer there.
Thank you, Ms. Lambropoulos.
Ms. Michaud, you have the floor for six minutes.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Ms. Michaud, your time is up.
Mr. Harris, you have six minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Harris, I just want to reflect on the use of certain language, even in the context of this conversation. There have been some real difficulties that our overall society has had with some use of some words. I just want, in future as we go through our testimony, to avoid the use of certain language.
With that, you can continue, Mr. Harris.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
We're going to have to leave the question there, as Mr. Harris is way over his time. Maybe you could circle back to the answer at some point, because it is an important question.
Colleagues, we have 15 minutes, and we have 25 minutes of questions in the next round.
I'm going to arbitrarily drop a minute off everybody's questioning time. That way, we'll be somewhere close to the time that we've allocated.
Mr. Kurek, you now have four minutes.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
You have a minute and a half.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Inspector Roy.
Madam Damoff, you have four minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Unfortunately, we cannot take your quick example.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Yes. I'm already getting heat from the various whips' offices that we have two meetings stacked up behind us, and we have a very important second hour to talk, as well.
We'll to to Madame Michaud for one minute, and Mr. Harris for one minute.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Again, I apologize for cutting people off, but it is what it is.
Mr. Harris, to keep this within a minute would be a miracle.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
We'll have to leave it there.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Harris.
Mr. Van Popta, you have four minutes.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Van Popta.
For the final four minutes we have Mr. Lightbound.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
On behalf of the committee, I want to thank both of our witnesses today. As you can see, the committee is very engaged in this study, and your contribution will be recognized not only in the record but also in our summary of evidence as we attempt to make some effort to put together a report and to ask the government to respond to it in an expeditious fashion.
Some of the testimony was encouraging, particularly the testimony by Inspector Roy. Other testimony was maybe not quite so encouraging.
With that, colleagues, I'm going to adjourn this meeting. I'm not suspending it, but adjourning it because we have to sign out and then sign back in. All of you have received your virtual codes to sign back in. The sooner we do that, the sooner we can get on to our in camera meeting.
With that, the meeting is adjourned.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
I'm calling this meeting to order.
Welcome, all of you, to meeting number 10 of the public safety committee.
We have, as our witness today, retired Supreme Court justice Mr. Michel Bastarache, who has co-authored a report called “Broken Dreams Broken Lives: The Devastating Effects of Sexual Harassment On Women in the RCMP”. It's a very profound and very disturbing report.
Mr. Justice Bastarache, welcome to the committee. We look forward to what you have to say. Generally, we would ask you to speak for about 10 minutes in opening remarks, and we'd have fully two hours with you.
I apologize for the late start, but it is the new way of doing things when it comes to votes in the House. Again, I apologize for that.
Welcome to the committee. We are very keen to hear what you have to say.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Excuse me, Justice Bastarache. The interpreters are having a bit of difficulty hearing you. If you could hold your microphone up a bit closer to your mouth, it'll work a bit better.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Excellent. That's much better, yes. Thank you for that.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
You've just put yourself on mute inadvertently.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Just repeat your last two sentences, if you would, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Justice Bastarache, as hesitant as I am to interrupt a Supreme Court Justice, we generally allocate 10 minutes, and we're well over our 10-minute time limit, but if you could conclude, I know members are keen to ask you a few questions.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you again for your report.
Before I call on my colleagues, I want to reference not only your report but also its conclusion, in which you say that you:
do not see any way forward without some form of sustained independent and external pressure. There are measures that may be taken to address specific issues, but I am not confident that this will correct the fundamental problems in the RCMP.In my view, the time has come to ask some hard questions about the structure and governance of federal policing in Canada. The past has demonstrated that change cannot come from within the RCMP. There must be a rigorous review of the RCMP followed by changes that will ensure that federal policing is delivered efficiently in a manner compliant with the Charter value of equality and with the Government of Canada’s commitment to gender equality, including in the workplace.
You may or may not know, Justice Bastarache, that this committee has been conducting a study on racism in policing. It does echo uncannily some of the testimony that we have heard. I'm going to turn it over to my colleagues now, but from the chair's standpoint, this is a core question. We have had report after report; we've had the commissioner here multiple times; we've had the minister here multiple times—in fact we've had several ministers here—and you are really calling into question whether this can actually be fixed.
I'm not going to ask you to respond to that, but that, from the chair's standpoint, is the core question that needs to be asked.
With that, Mr. Motz, you have six minutes, followed by Madame Damoff, Madame Michaud and Mr. Harris, for six minutes each.
Mr. Motz, go ahead, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Motz. We're going to have to leave it there.
Madam Damoff, you have six minutes.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Yes, the French interpretation just overrode the English.
Just go back and continue on. We'll see whether we're back on.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
We're going to have to leave it there, unfortunately, Ms. Damoff.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
We have to leave it there. Thank you.
Ms. Michaud, you have the floor for six minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
We're going to have to leave it there.
Thank you, Ms. Michaud.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
It's Mr. Harris for six minutes, please.
You're on mute, Jack.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Harris, you've gone quite a bit past your time, but that's an extremely important question.
Mr. Harris will have a second round of questions very shortly. If you could pick up the answer at that time, it would be helpful. That way we can keep to some sort of time schedule.
With that, I'll call on Mr. Van Popta for five minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
You have 30 seconds.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
We're going to have to leave that answer there, Mr. Van Popta.
Madam Khera, go ahead for five minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
You have a little less than 15 seconds.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Madam Khera.
Ms. Michaud, go ahead for two and a half minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Ms. Michaud.
Mr. Harris, please, for two and a half minutes.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Harris.
Madam Stubbs, go ahead for five minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Madam Stubbs.
Mr. Iacono, go ahead for five minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
No. What I propose is that—
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
You're a little premature in your point of order, may I say. Let us finish with Mr. Iacono. Then I'll make a proposal to the committee that possibly will make you happy, Mr. Harris.
Mr. Iacono, we will restart your time. You have five minutes, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
We'll have to leave it there, Mr. Iacono.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Colleagues, that completes two rounds.
We have the witness for another 40 or 45 minutes, assuming he can survive the questioning for the next 40 or 45 minutes.
I first of all want to ask you, Justice Bastarache, whether you feel you need a break. If you don't, we'll just keep on plowing along. If you do, we'll suspend for a minute or two while we have a break. Are you in need of a break?
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Okay, good.
Colleagues, what I propose is to continue on with five-minute rounds, and then if there's still time remaining, we can have a fourth round, and we'll figure out whether it's a two-minute or a three-minute round, and that should take us to 10 after six.
Does that satisfy you, Mr. Harris?
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
I'm saying five, five, two and a half, two and a half.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Yes, I hear you. That is not a precedent for the public safety committee. When we reconstituted the committee at the start of this session, the third round was contemplated to be five, five, two and a half, two and a half minutes. That's what I propose. I expect that we'll be able to squeeze a few more questions in that way.
With that, Mr. Kurek, you have five minutes. Go ahead, please.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Are we back on proper translation?
A voice: Yes.
The Chair: Okay.
You have 30 seconds left, Mr. Kurek.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
We can hear you fine.
In light of the circumstances, perhaps Mr. Justice Bastarache would be prepared to repeat a little bit of what he just said.
Results: 1 - 100 of 541 | Page: 1 of 6

1
2
3
4
5
6
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data