Committee studying lawful access bill urged to protect encryption, balance privacy with police needs

Detractors — and defenders — of a liberalist regime greenback promising jurisprudence enforcement and intelligence service agencies easier access to Canadians' information during investigations made their pitches Tuesday to MPs weighing whether it should be amended.

Testifying at the tail end of a marathon public safety committee meeting Tuesday evening, the Canadian Telecommunications Association's vice-president Eric Smith summed up the issue facing lawmakers studying Bill C-22: how to balance privacy rights with law enforcement and national security agencies' ability to access information.

"That balance is critically important because Canadians use digital services every day," he said.

The lawful access legislation would require yet-to-be-defined electronic service providers to adapt their systems to make it easier to hand over requested information to security and intelligence officials, provided they have a warrant.

The bill would also require core providers to retain metadata — like call logs and location — for up to one year.

The government has argued it lags behind its Five Eyes intelligence partners by not having an updated lawful access regime to help law enforcement and intelligence services access digital information during investigations.

That has stirred up intense backlash from major tech companies like Google, Apple and Meta to privacy advocates who all argue the bill's demands would weaken or break encryption — a key safety measure used by activists, lawmakers, journalists and everyday Canadians to safeguard communications and other important information. 

Tech giants 'misinterpreting' lawful access safeguards: public safety minister

Apple depends on its security technology to "store and process highly sensitive data like health metrics, photos and the locations of our loved ones," Erik Neuenchwander, the company's senior director of user privacy and child safety, told the committee.

"As technology evolves, so do the bad actors trying to steal our data.… We do not know of a way to deploy encryption technology that provides access only for the good guys without creating new ways for the bad guys to break in."

Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree has repeated that it's not the government's intention to weaken privacy protections like encryption.

Both Apple and Google executives told the committee that should be made more clear in the legislation. The committee heard a similar request from Meta.

Federal Privacy Commissioner Philippe Dufresne said he also has concerns. He told the committee that he was consulted by the government after its first attempt at bringing in a lawful access bill, Bill C-2, folded under backlash. It was amended and reintroduced as Bill C-22 earlier this year.

But "there remain privacy concerns," he told the committee.

Dufresne put forward eight recommendations, including narrowing the definition of subscriber information to just names, addresses, telephone numbers and IP addresses, and limiting the entities who would be compelled to provide that information to telecommunications service providers.

He also said the bill's technical obligations on electronic providers should "be limited to what is necessary and proportionate."

"The longer you keep information, the more there's a risk in terms of privacy breach, the more there is an impact if there's a privacy breach," Dufresne told the committee.

Law enforcement agencies and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) have argued public safety is at risk if Canada doesn't pass a lawful access regime, arguing they are outpaced by evolving technology hampering their ability to investigate criminal and national security cases.

During a separate round of testimony, Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police president and Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Thomas Carrique told the committee the "concerns by some major telecommunication companies and special interest privacy advocates are overstated."

"Too often, lawful access debates focus exclusively on privacy interests of suspects and the financial interests of Big Tech, while overlooking the rights of victims to safety, justice and timely intervention," he said.

"[Bill C-22] ensures electronic service providers are not serving as a safe haven for criminal and terrorist related activity, compromising public safety locally, nationally and internationally."

Lawful access bill faces pushback from tech companies, privacy advocates

During an exchange with Neuenchwander, Liberal MP Anthony Housefather suggested some of the tech giant's concerns are what's best for their companies' interests and "not necessarily in the national interest."

"I don't disagree with some of the objections you raised, but there are claims that are being made, for example, surveillance equipment being installed in devices … that I don't think are reasonable or logical," he said.

Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown, who has seen a spate of violent extortion attempts in his city, also testified in favour of the bill and urged the committee to "not dither or delay."

"This could be the most significant investigative tool for police since DNA evidence changed the game," he said.

"Organized crime does not want Canada to update our lawful access legislation. They've been able to, frankly, conduct criminal activity with impunity in our country. Police have their hands tied."

The Communications Security Establishment (CSE) — the country's foreign signals intelligence agency and the government's cybersecurity authority — said the bill doesn't create "backdoors" as some have argued.

"A backdoor creates a lasting, generalized vulnerability that can be exploited by malicious actors. Lawful access under C-22, by contrast, is intended to obtain limited and specific information held by an electronic service provider via controlled, authorized requests without undermining cybersecurity," the agency said in a written submission to committee.

"Strong encryption is fundamental to Canada's cybersecurity, economic stability and national security."

Conservative MP Frank Caputo, the party's public safety critic, suggested Monday the Opposition will be floating amendments to codify encryption protections.

"Canadians want to know that their end-to-end encryption won't be targeted," he said.

The British Columbia MP said Conservatives on committee are looking to "get the best bill possible," adding the Liberals "have really dropped the ball" in both drafting and explaining C-22.

The committee heard from dozens of witnesses over the span of three meetings. Tuesday's hearing was the last scheduled meeting before MPs consider consider whether changes should be made to the controversial bill.

Conservatives are pushing to extend the debate, arguing the controversial bill is being rammed through Parliament. The meeting was adjourned before the issue was sorted.

Anandasangaree has suggested publicly that he's open to amendments. His office has also said he hopes to pass the bill before Parliament's summer break.

Reporter

---

---