THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL FINANCE
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Tuesday, October 22, 2024
The Standing Senate Committee on National Finance met this day at 9 a.m. [ET] to study the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025, with the exception of Library of Parliament Vote 1.
Senator Claude Carignan (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Good morning and welcome, honourable senators. Before we begin, I would like to ask all senators and other in-person participants to consult the cards on the table for guidelines to prevent audio feedback incidents.
Please keep your earpiece away from all microphones at all times. When you aren’t using your earpiece, place it face down on the sticker placed on the table for this purpose. Thank you all for your cooperation.
Welcome, senators and Canadians joining us on sencanada.ca. My name is Claude Carignan. I’m a senator from Quebec and the chair of the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance. I would now like to ask my colleagues to introduce themselves, starting on my left.
Senator Forest: Hello and welcome. I’m Éric Forest, an independent senator, and I represent the Gulf division, in Quebec.
Senator Galvez: Rosa Galvez from Quebec.
[English]
Senator MacAdam: Jane MacAdam, Prince Edward Island.
Senator Osler: Gigi Osler, Manitoba.
Senator Marshall: Elizabeth Marshall, Newfoundland and Labrador.
Senator Smith: Larry Smith, Quebec.
[Translation]
The Chair: Honourable senators, today, we are resuming our study on the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025, which was referred to the Senate on March 19, 2024.
We are pleased to have with us today senior officials from Statistics Canada, Justice Canada, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and the Communications Security Establishment. Welcome and thank you for accepting our invitation. One official from each organization will give an opening statement of around four to five minutes, and then we will begin questions.
It is my pleasure to introduce Kathleen Mitchell, Assistant Chief Statistician, Corporate Strategy and Management, and Chief Financial Officer, Statistics Canada; Bill Kroll, Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Deputy Minister, Management Sector, Justice Canada; Jerome Laliberté, Deputy Director of Administration and Chief Financial Officer, Canadian Security Intelligence Service; and Christopher Williams, Assistant Deputy Minister, Authorities, Compliance and Transparency, Communications Security Establishment.
On that note, I will give the floor to Kathleen Mitchell to provide her opening statement, followed by Bill Kroll, Jerome Laliberté and Christopher Williams. Go ahead, Ms. Mitchell.
Kathleen Mitchell, Assistant Chief Statistician, Corporate Strategy and Management, and Chief Financial Officer, Statistics Canada: Mr. Chair, honourable committee members, it is my pleasure to be here today to discuss the 2024-25 Main Estimates for Statistics Canada. I would like to begin by acknowledging that I am delivering these remarks from the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe people. My name is Kathleen Mitchell, and I am the Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Chief Statistician of Corporate Strategy and Management at Statistics Canada. Since I spoke to this committee last October, and under the leadership of our new Chief Statistician, André Loranger, the agency has a renewed focus on increasing our relevance to Canadians by capitalizing on our expertise and modernization journey so far. Our top priority is to provide unbiased, trusted and high-quality statistical data that serve the public interest, ensuring that Canadians and stakeholders have the information they need to make evidence-based decisions.
[English]
To continue this important work, our agency has requested $736.6 million in total authorities in the Main Estimates. This increase of $204.5 million compared with last year is primarily due to the cyclical nature of the census program as well as the funding received to compensate for the impact of collective bargaining agreements. This funding will allow Statistics Canada to innovate and leverage modern technologies and to invest in our biggest asset — our people.
By optimizing our statistical infrastructure and tools to meet the sophisticated needs of our users, we can focus on providing the pertinent information that’s needed, particularly as we prepare for the next Census of Population in 2026. The data-driven insights from the census and from all our statistical programs work their way through our important stakeholders, such as federal departments, provinces and academia, to inform policies that shape our country.
To help accomplish this, there are a few notable increases to Statistics Canada’s authorities. The $90.3 million increase in funding for the 2026 Census of Population program will support important statistical tests in 2024 to improve the collection and quality of the data as the program ramps up.
The Census of Agriculture is conducted in parallel with the Census of Population. It will also undergo testing in 2024 in preparation for 2026 and has an increase of $9.6 million in funding. There was a net increase of $19.7 million for new initiatives included in Budget 2023, such as the Canadian Dental Care Plan and a world-class health data system for Canadians. This increase is offset by the $4.2 million decrease from the refocusing government spending initiative.
An increase of $115.3 million for other items includes funding received to compensate for the impact of collective bargaining agreements as well as for our investments in recent years to integrate cutting-edge tools and technologies to improve operations and services supported by cloud infrastructure.
This is offset primarily by a decrease of $30.4 million for various items, such as the 2021 census programs. Of our total Main Estimates, 88% are for operational costs needing Parliament’s approval, with 85% of that dedicated to salaries for 5,633 full-time equivalent employees. The remaining funds cover other operating costs, such as IT and professional services. Additionally, Statistics Canada pays the salaries of 1,190 full-time equivalent employees using cost-recovery revenues. In recent years, this has represented between $120 million and $159 million annually, much of which comes from federal departments and agencies to fund specific statistical projects.
[Translation]
In conclusion, the 2024-25 Main Estimates reflect Statistics Canada’s commitment to sound stewardship of public resources, and support our mission to provide high-quality, reliable data for Canadians.
Mr. Chair, I would like to thank you again for the opportunity to present today. I look forward to answering your questions.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
[English]
Bill Kroll, Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Deputy Minister, Management Sector: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning, everyone.
My name is Bill Kroll and I am the Assistant Deputy Minister of the Management Sector and Chief Financial Officer at the Department of Justice Canada. My pronouns are he/him.
I would like to start by acknowledging that we are meeting on the traditional and unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg people.
I am joined today by my colleagues Laurie Sargent, Assistant Deputy Minister, Indigenous Rights and Relations Portfolio; Elizabeth Hendy, Director General, Programs Branch; and Matthew Taylor, Senior General Counsel and Director General, Criminal Law Policy Section. We are pleased to be here today to provide you with an overview of Justice Canada’s Main Estimates for 2024-25.
As highlighted in the departmental plan, Justice Canada’s priorities include continuing our work to keep Canadians safe in our communities and online; support the needs of the courts; improve access to justice in Canada, particularly for Black, Indigenous and racialized people; and supporting victims and survivors of crime.
Our work would not be possible without the funding secured through the 2024-25 Main Estimates, which provide Justice Canada with a total of $927.9 million in voted and statutory authorities.
In addition, through its vote-netted revenue authority, Justice Canada is also authorized to collect and reinvest revenues earned from the provision of legal services to client departments and agencies. For this year, this additional spending authority is estimated to be $442 million, bringing our total authorities to almost $1.4 billion.
The Department of Justice has two core responsibilities — justice system support and legal services.
[Translation]
A total of $602.5 million, or 44% of total departmental spending, is devoted to supporting the justice system, through which the department disburses $541.8 million in grants and contributions. The remainder of our operating expenses goes to supporting the development and coordination of legislative reform, strategic options and federal justice initiatives, and testing innovative approaches to strengthen our legal framework in various areas.
This includes work on Indigenous issues such as the Indigenous Justice Strategy, ongoing implementation of the United Nations Declaration Act, as well as responding to Calls for Justice from the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls and Calls to Action from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
[English]
Legal services account for $230.9 million in net spending and $613.2 million including vote-netted revenue. This represents about 45% of our total expenditures. This funding supports federal client departments and agencies in meeting their priorities through the provision of legal advisory services, litigation services and legislative and regulatory drafting services. This includes advancing Indigenous rights and relations; advancing regulatory and legislative reform; and protecting the safety of Canadians.
[Translation]
Finally, the department’s operations are supported by our internal services. This accounts for $94.5 million in net expenditures and $154.3 million, including vote-netted revenue, or approximately 11% of our total expenditures.
[English]
The 2024-25 total spending authorities in Main Estimates decreased by $59.7 million when compared to last year’s Main Estimates. Most of this decrease is related to the sunsetting of funds which have been renewed in Budget 2024 as well as some other increases in funding. For example, funding was announced in Budget 2024 to renew $60 million annually in funding for criminal legal aid; $11.3 million in funding to improve access to justice for Indigenous people and to address systemic barriers in the criminal justice system; and $10.9 million for initiatives to address workplace sexual harassment.
The department has also received additional funding. For example, there is $21.8 million in increases in funding to renew and enhance the Family Information Liaison Units and Community Support and Healing for Families programs as part of our response to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls Final Report.
[Translation]
In summary, the Main Estimates will enable the department to continue advancing access to justice in Canada, while supporting many government priorities, including those of our clients.
That concludes my opening remarks. My colleagues and I will be happy to answer any questions you may have.
The Chair: Thank you.
[English]
Jerome Laliberté, Deputy Director of Administration and Chief Financial Officer, Canadian Security Intelligence Service: Good morning, chair and members of the committee. It is an honour to join you to answer your questions about the Canadian Security Intelligence Service’s Main Estimates for 2024-25 and to shed light on the ways in which the service contributes to protecting Canada and Canadians against national security threats.
The Canadian Security Intelligence Service, or CSIS, is responsible for investigating, assessing, advising and reducing threats to Canada’s national security, which includes espionage, foreign interference, terrorism and subversion.
In order to successfully carry out its mandate, it is imperative that CSIS remain nimble to keep pace with the ever-evolving national security threat environment. CSIS thus aligns its functions with other Government of Canada initiatives and reviews its priorities on an ongoing basis to ensure they reflect the current threat environment.
While detailed breakdowns of CSIS expenditures are classified, I can confirm that CSIS received $702.6 million in the 2024-25 Main Estimates, including $54.5 million for statutory expenditures related to employee benefits. These figures represent an increase of $39.8 million, or about 6%, from the previous year, which is largely attributable to increases to Employee Benefit Plan adjustments, economic increases for employees, new funding for Canada’s Indo-Pacific Strategy and temporary funding for digital enablement. This funding will allow the service to respond to the government’s priorities and continue its important work in keeping Canadians safe.
This year marks CSIS’s fortieth anniversary and a historic year for national security. Matters of national security are resonating with Canadians across the country, who helped to shape the future of CSIS by providing input on proposed amendments to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, or CSIS Act.
Following these consultations, Bill C-70, An Act Respecting Countering Foreign Interference was tabled, which received Royal Assent in June 2024, leading to the most important set of amendments to the CSIS Act since its creation in 1984. These amendments will further assist CSIS in carrying out its mandate in a technologically complex operational environment.
These changes are essential as the demand for and interest in CSIS intelligence and advice is greater than ever. The rise in violent rhetoric and hate crimes targeting Canadian Jewish and Muslim communities since the events of October 7, 2023, and the prevalent threat of foreign interference are just a few examples of how the threat landscape in Canada is evolving and emphasizes the growing need for CSIS products and expertise.
Significant and important funding provided through Budget 2024 will also help to ensure that CSIS can continue to meet these growing demands. Investments of $655.7 million over eight years, starting in 2024-25 with $191.1 million in remaining amortization and $114.7 million ongoing, will equip CSIS with tools to combat emerging global threats and keep pace with technological developments. Importantly, these investments signal a vote of confidence in CSIS and the work it undertakes to protect Canadians.
I want to emphasize that the employees of CSIS truly make it a leading intelligence service. They include extraordinary and talented people who bring expertise, skill, dedication and life experience, all of which are integral to ensuring CSIS is effective in successfully carrying out its mandate to protect all Canadians.
I will conclude by noting that given its mandate and specific operational requirements, and in order to protect the safety and security of Canadians, CSIS does not generally disclose details related to expenditures or budgets beyond those publicly reported in the estimates, public accounts and the federal budget. I will therefore be limited in what I am able to discuss with you today.
Nonetheless, I welcome this opportunity for a frank and transparent discussion, to the extent possible, on CSIS’s funding and will be happy to answer your questions.
The Chair: Thank you. Mr. Williams, please go ahead.
Christopher Williams, Assistant Deputy Minister, Authorities, Compliance and Transparency, Communications Security Establishment: Good morning, chair and committee members. Thank you for the invitation to appear today to discuss Communications Security Establishment’s Main Estimates for 2024-25.
My name is Christopher Williams, and I am the Assistant Deputy Minister of Authorities, Compliance and Transparency at Communications Security Establishment Canada, or CSE. I am joined by my colleague Julie Chassé, who is our Associate Chief Financial Officer.
For committee members unfamiliar with CSE, we are part of the defence portfolio, reporting directly to the Minister of National Defence.
[Translation]
The Communications Security Establishment, or CSE, is the national cryptologic agency for foreign intelligence and the technical authority for cybersecurity and information assurance.
[English]
The Communications Security Establishment Act sets out five aspects of our mandate including cybersecurity and information assurance, foreign intelligence, defensive and active cyber operations and technical and operational assistance to federal partners. In short, we intercept and analyze foreign electronic communications to provide the Government of Canada with unique information about foreign threats to Canadian security and prosperity and important insights to support foreign policy and decision making.
CSE’s Canadian Centre for Cyber Security, which we refer to as the Cyber Centre, serves as a unified source of expert advice, guidance and support on cyber security operational matters.
[Translation]
The CSE is charged with protecting the federal government’s information systems networks. To do so, it deploys sophisticated cyberdefence mechanisms based on the unique intelligence available through the CSE.
[English]
Through the Cyber Centre, we also advise and assist other levels of government and the operators of Canada’s critical infrastructure, such as banks, telecommunications companies and other industries that are essential for the functioning of our society and economy. We also offer simple and effective cyber security tips that all Canadians can use to help protect themselves online.
[Translation]
In a global environment shaped by destabilizing events, both state-sponsored and non-state-sponsored threat actors are adapting their methods and using emerging technologies to find new ways of using the internet for malicious purposes to achieve their financial, geopolitical or ideological goals.
[English]
State-sponsored threat activity against Canada remains a constant and ongoing threat. The Cyber Centre’s unclassified National Cyber Threat Assessment report assesses that the state-sponsored cyber programs of China, Russia, Iran and North Korea continue to pose the greatest strategic cyber threats to Canada. As noted in that report, nation states are increasingly willing and able to use misinformation and disinformation to advance their geopolitical interests.
Beyond disinformation, state-sponsored actors are targeting critical infrastructure to collect information through espionage, to pre-position in case of future hostilities and as a form of power projection and intimidation. We know that cyber incidents, such as ransomware, dedicated denial of service incidents and supply chain compromises are occurring more frequently across all industry sectors. That is why Bill C-26, An Act respecting cyber security, currently at second reading before the Senate, is so important. It will help the government improve baseline cyber security and incident reporting across critical federally regulated industry sectors.
CSE assesses that, overall, Canada is a lower priority target for cyber threat activity than some of our allies, such as the U.S. and U.K. However, Canada does not exist in a vacuum, and cyber activity affecting our allies’ democratic processes and the overall geopolitical landscape will likely continue to have an impact on Canada as well.
[Translation]
The CSE leverages the full range of its powers, including those related to cybersecurity, the collection of foreign signals intelligence, and the conduct of active and defensive cyber operations, to strengthen Canada’s security posture against foreign interference and inflict costs on malicious actors seeking to target our Canada’s systems of importance.
[English]
To address the evolving threat environment in which CSE operates, the Government of Canada has continued to make significant investments in CSE. This includes an $875.2 million investment over five years through Budget 2022 and, more recently, another investment through the government’s defence policy update.
[Translation]
The updated defence policy proposes significant new investments in the CSE, through the 2024 budget, to support foreign cyber operations and strengthen foreign intelligence capabilities.
[English]
The defence policy update includes a commitment of $917 million over five years to support Canada’s foreign cyber operations program and to increase foreign intelligence collection capabilities, as well as a total commitment of $2.83 billion over 20 years for foreign intelligence. CSE’s 2024-25 main estimates are just over $1 billion. This funding will contribute to our foreign intelligence, cybersecurity and cyber mandate.
The spending outlined in the estimates reflects the timely and essential work being done to enhance Canada’s overall cyber security posture.
[Translation]
With this funding, the CSE will continue to work closely with its national and international partners, including the Five Eyes, to ensure Canada’s cyber resilience to online threats.
[English]
Once again, thank you for the invitation to appear before the committee today. I look forward to answering any questions you may have.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you. We will now start our question period.
[English]
Senator Marshall: Thank you and welcome to our panel today. My questions are for Mr. Williams, but I want one quick clarification from Mr. Laliberté on his opening remarks.
Mr. Laliberté, you mentioned in your opening remarks the limited financial information that is being provided. Do you have an auditor? Do you actually audit financial statements and do not provide them or are you not audited? That’s all I need to know.
Mr. Laliberté: We have an internal auditing function at CSIS that oversees the financial statements, including an independent audit committee. One of their important functions is to review our financial statements and recommend their approval by our director.
Senator Marshall: That’s great. Thank you very much.
Mr. Williams, I was looking at your annual report and the section on critical infrastructure. You have a section there on the energy sector, but you mostly refer to oil and gas. I was looking at the electricity grid because the demand for electricity is growing. I know Cuba is having their struggles down there right now. But in Canada, the electrical grid is mostly governed by provincial Crown corporations. Everybody is looking after their own.
My question is: Who is looking after the national interests? The Auditor General in her recent report focused on that there seems to be a tendency for the organizations to work in silos. Can you address that question of the electricity grid in Canada and who is looking after it from a national perspective?
Mr. Williams: From a national perspective, I would point to a few things. I referenced Bill C-26 in my opening remarks. This piece of legislation, should it receive Royal Assent and pass, goes a long way to create mandatory reporting. It allows our Cyber Centre to engage and provide advice and guidance to all energy producers. That’s one step that is super important.
Our Cyber Centre is constantly engaging with the energy sector across all levels. We share threat information in real time. There are services that we encourage all Canadian enterprises to sign up for. When we see a threat we can put it into our system, and there is an automated notification system people can sign up for and receive the same kinds of threat information that we are building into the Government of Canada’s defences.
Senator Marshall: For the electricity grid, is there a separate section that looks after the Crown corporations plus the private sector companies that are involved in the electricity grid?
Mr. Williams: A separate section of the Cyber Center?
Senator Marshall: Yes.
Mr. Williams: We have a partnerships team, which is built into the sector, so absolutely we have a specific sector of the Cyber Center whose job it is to engage with the energy providers to ensure they have access to the information they need to help protect their systems. Obviously, they are considered a very high priority for our organization. On top of that, just last year or the year before — I can’t remember — we actually had a secret level briefing. We cleared people to the secret level and had briefings across the country with the energy sector to help share a little more information than we are able to in the public space.
Senator Marshall: When you say the “energy sector,” you are also talking about the electricity grid?
Mr. Williams: Yes, the entire sector.
Senator Marshall: Okay. I have read the Auditor General’s report, and I was looking at your level of funding. I know that you received additional funding in 2022 and it was spanned over five years, but there have been subsequent cuts now. You are part of the government’s refocusing of expenditures.
The Auditor General raised various concerns and this issue about the silos. She said that Canada does not have the capacity and tools to fight cybercrime. Given the constraints, you now have to put some improvements into the works, but you are being caught back. Square that up for me. You are being cut, but you have to improve.
Mr. Williams: Yes. Thank you for the question. The Main Estimates include roughly $5.6 million in cuts. That’s offset, of course, by the investments I mentioned in my opening remarks. Cybersecurity is a team sport in this space, especially in the cybercrime space. We are not a law enforcement agency; we work closely with our colleagues in the RCMP. We always welcome recommendations from the Auditor General on ways to improve our ability to help protect Canada against cybercrime. We work very closely with our partners domestically — the RCMP, our colleagues at CSIS — and our international partners to try to raise the bar against these types of things.
In the U.K., for example, we are seeing a type of activity that we have not yet seen in Canada. They are able to share their information with us, and we are able to distill it to a level where we can share with Canadians and Canadian businesses so they can protect themselves and vice versa. When we see something, we feed it into the system. And it’s not just for the government but the private sector as well. We work closely with them, and we are sharing threat information in real time.
[Translation]
Senator Forest: Thank you for being here, Mr. Kroll. I’ll start by asking you a question regarding online hate and Bill C-63, which is still before the House of Commons. I’m thinking of the provisions preventing the dissemination of sexually explicit material, which have been widely commended.
That said, according to preliminary forecasts obtained by Canadian Heritage from the Parliamentary Budget Officer, the bill will result in an additional 330 public servants and $200 million more in annual government spending, specifically for the creation of the digital safety office, digital safety commission and digital safety ombudsperson. My question is as follows. Am I to understand that the government’s objectives, which are very noble, stem from discussions between Canadian Heritage and your department to assess whether the new system is being structured as efficiently and effectively as possible? Was the current context taken into account, given the challenges around financial management and increasing the number of public servants?
[English]
Mr. Kroll: Thank you very much for the question. I might turn to one of my colleagues to help me answer it, but I can tell you that when we put these proposals together, there’s a very rigorous challenge function in the costing at the conception stage. We do that internally within the department, and then we work with our Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat colleagues to make sure that whatever proposal goes forward is properly costed and funded so that we’ll be able to achieve the objectives of the program or the policy.
In fact, as Chief Financial Officer, I have to sign an attestation that we’ve done that due diligence.
From a financial perspective, whenever a proposal is tabled that would be associated with any kind of proposed legislation like this one, that due diligence is always done throughout the process.
[Translation]
Senator Forest: The analysis has been completed and you are ready to sign the attestation?
Mr. Kroll: Yes, I’ve already signed the attestation. Throughout the process, it’s possible to review and revise figures if needed, but initially, we always try to ensure that the figures in the proposal are defensible and based on a rigorous analysis.
Senator Forest: Thank you.
Ms. Mitchell, I’d like to highlight the contribution of the Centre for Municipal and Local Data, which you set up. Do you intend to invest more funds in the experimental dashboard tool? I note that Quebec City and Montreal are the only Quebec municipalities included. There are 1,008 municipalities in Quebec, so 1,006 remain. Since those Quebec municipalities are excluded from the tool, would it be appropriate to include others eventually?
Ms. Mitchell: Providing data to researchers is a priority for Statistics Canada.
[English]
We did receive funding for the Disaggregated Data Action Plan in Budget 2021. That included a component of providing funding at a lower level of geography to municipalities. We are very open to working closely with researchers on improving access to different data in different parts of the country.
Thank you for your support for the program. It’s an important part of our mandate — providing data to the researchers for the lower levels of geography.
[Translation]
Thank you for your question.
Senator Forest: The partnership has existed since 2020. Could you give us a few examples of useful projects developed jointly by your organization, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, and municipalities?
Ms. Mitchell: Thank you for your question.
[English]
I would like to use a recent example. We’re working with the City of Toronto with researchers on what’s called SafeTO. We’re looking at different data source sets with researchers to look at different safety priorities for the City of Toronto. That’s one example of something we’re doing locally, but I don’t have an example on hand for the City of Montreal.
[Translation]
Thanks for the question.
Senator Forest: Can the municipalities tell you their needs, their concerns and issues they wish you to collaborate on? Is the communication two-way?
Ms. Mitchell: Absolutely. Thank you for the question. We conduct many consultations throughout the country. We have a phone line so that any Canadian who wishes to do so can advise us on the priorities in their city or region. We’ve also experimented with new technologies to interact with Canadians, such as a chatbot. Indeed, consulting Canadians is a priority. We’ve also just wrapped up 2026 census consultations, which involved a large number of communities from across the country. That’s another example.
[English]
Senator Smith: Ms. Mitchell, according to Statistics Canada’s departmental plan, the agency is focusing on enhancing its statistical tools for measuring affordability through the development of the Food Price Data Hub as well as a collaboration with partners on housing-related data strategies.
Could you expand upon those initiatives? How will they improve the ability of policy-makers, businesses and consumers to understand and respond to the impacts of inflation, especially upon food and housing?
Ms. Mitchell: Thank you very much for the question.
Food pricing has been a priority for Statistics Canada. We recently developed the Food Price Data Hub with Agriculture and Agri-food Canada and Innovation, Science and Economic Development to provide access to Canadians to direct price changes for different types of grocery items. That was one of the initiatives we did this year.
Senator Smith: Is there data you can share with us?
Ms. Mitchell: In terms of food, what I have with me today, putting food on the table has increased by 2.4% in August 2023. I apologize; I’m not the specialist on price inflation, but I’m happy to use some of the information I brought with me today. In the Consumer Price Index, or CPI, there are three major components for how we measure inflation. The first is food prices, which is about 17% of CPI. The larger one is shelter, which is about almost 30% of CPI. The third component is transportation.
We have quite a detailed food program where we use scanner data from retailers across the country. We also do website scraping. So we measure food prices closely, month over month, in our Consumer Price Index.
Senator Smith: Do you have any updates on what’s going on with housing?
Ms. Mitchell: On housing, yes. Thank you for the question.
In terms of funding for housing, Budget 2017 provided Statistics Canada with ongoing funding of $6.1 million as part of a housing statistics framework under the responsibility of the Canadian Housing Statistics Program. Budget 2024 announced $20 million in funding to be shared with Statistics Canada and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation over four years. We’re just working on submitting that program for approval, so I don’t have further details to share at this point.
Senator Smith: Continuing on, looking at Indigenous data collection and capacity building, Statistics Canada has committed to improving data collection for First Nations, Métis and Inuit peoples through initiatives like the Transformational Approach to Indigenous Data and the Survey Series on First Nations People, Métis and Inuit.
Given that Canada has historically lacked quality data collection on Indigenous peoples, what specific measures are being implemented to address this gap and ensure the data collected accurately reflects the realities of Indigenous communities?
Ms. Mitchell: Thank you for the question.
As I mentioned to the other honourable senator, Statistics Canada received funding in Budget 2021 for the Disaggregated Data Action Plan, which has an Indigenous component to that, providing data at lower levels of geography but also for different communities.
I’m not a specialist, so I’m happy to take a question back for further information, but I’m not sure how to answer your specific question.
Senator Smith: It would be great if you can do that and if you could give us a breakdown in terms of where the program is at and sort of checkpoint progressions. That would be welcome.
How does Statistics Canada plan to work with Indigenous communities to ensure that the data sovereignty and self-determination are respected in the process? I would also like to understand the next steps once the data is collected. How will Statistics Canada work with its partner organizations to better understand the data and improve the lives of Indigenous peoples? Do you have metrics for this? Is there a measurement system for some of these initiatives?
Ms. Mitchell: I’m not sure if we have the specific measurements that you’re referring to, but Statistics Canada has a long-standing Indigenous Liaison Program that has spanned decades, and it is absolutely a priority to co-develop programs with Indigenous communities, particularly during the census as well. But I don’t have a specific answer to your question.
Senator Smith: If you could find some measurements for us, that would be great, so we can see a start point and see how it’s progressing forward positively for the Indigenous communities. Thank you.
Senator Osler: Thank you to the witnesses for being here today. My question is for Statistics Canada and it’s on knowledge translation.
You mentioned, Ms. Mitchell, in your opening statement that the goal is to provide unbiased, trusted statistical data for Canadians to make data-driven decisions. We’ve heard in our current context in Canada of foreign interference, misinformation and disinformation, that the role of Statistics Canada is as important as ever.
My first question is: What is Statistics Canada’s strategy to move collected data into the hands of Canadian organizations and people?
Ms. Mitchell: Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair. Statistics Canada does have a strategy that’s called Connecting with Canadians, and we have a number of different vehicles we use to connect with Canadians. Our primary vehicle is our website. On our website, we have a multitude of information, from data tables to insight articles and others. Also, we have a dynamic social media team that shares information with Canadians on different social media platforms, and it points back to our website as the source.
On the Statistics Canada website, there is a portion called the Trust Centre. In the Trust Centre, there are different pockets within to look at the different methods that Statistics Canada uses to ensure transparency and trust with Canadians.
Senator Osler: Relying mostly on the website requires people to go to the website. So you need to pull people in. You mentioned social media, so that is a bit of a push out. In order for everyday Canadians to make data-driven decisions, people need to know to trust Statistics Canada and to come to you for unbiased information.
Do you have any metrics to measure engagement with everyday Canadians, apart from perhaps just social media hits? Is there a vision in your strategy to push out information?
Ms. Mitchell: Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair. I didn’t mention the important relationship that we have with media. We have a strategy with working closely with media. We have what we call lock-ups, where we invite media in right before an important economic release to prepare and write stories.
We also have — I mentioned to the other honourable senator — a very fulsome consultation process where we invite Canadians to give us advice on all kinds of aspects of our work. Those are the two points I wanted to share with you.
Senator Osler: Perhaps just a final thought. We are living in an age where misinformation and disinformation are pushed out to Canadians, so relying simply to pull folks in is a bit passive. I’ll leave it at that. Thank you for your answers.
Senator Pate: Thank you to our witnesses. My questions are for Mr. Kroll. The 2024-25 Departmental Plan refers to passage of Bill C-40, respecting a miscarriages of justice commission as a key priority. The authors of the consultation report and recommendations meant to inform this legislation — in particular Justices Harry LaForme and Juanita Westmoreland-Traoré — have expressed significant concerns about the final version of the legislation, noting, for example, that the bill “. . . does nothing to assure the adequacy of the commission’s budget . . .” in particular putting at risk their vision of a proactive and systemic commission.
Under the current system, no women and very few Indigenous or Black folks have been able to have convictions overturned. Our office, as you may be aware, has been involved for the justices in the development of a report advocating a group review of the cases of 12 Indigenous women, with group reviews serving as a key way to emphasize systemic barriers that have prevented women from benefiting from conviction reviews in the past.
Given that Indigenous women are now half — one in two — of all prisoners in federal prisons for women, what assurances can you provide that concrete steps have been taken and funding is sufficient to prioritize reviews of miscarriages of justice for Indigenous women, in particular the 12 women in that report? More particularly, what funding has been allocated to ensure that reviews of the cases of Indigenous women are achieved in an effective way, including through group reviews, and that cases that may require a thorough and complex contextualization of experiences of systemic sexism and racism are not sidelined as a result of a lack of resources, capacity or mandate to respond?
Mr. Kroll: Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair. I’ll invite my colleague to come up who will be able to provide a bit more detail on that.
I can tell you, as I mentioned before, the process we go through when we develop one of these proposals is very rigorous. It involves various levels of development of the costing that would be required to support a commission like this and challenge function to make sure that we are putting together a cost structure and a proposal that represents best value for Canadians. That process applies to any proposal, including this one.
Having reviewed the costing associated with this bill, I can say that I’m pretty confident that it is going to be enough to support what is the aim of the commission. I don’t have any concerns from that perspective, but I’ll turn it over to my colleague who may be able to add more.
Matthew Taylor, Senior General Counsel and Director General, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice Canada: Thank you. I was asked to introduce myself. My name is Matthew Taylor. I’m with the Criminal Law Policy Section.
Thank you for the question. Just to build on what Mr. Kroll said — and I think this has already been shared with the Senate. Budget 2023 provided $83.9 million over five years, starting in fiscal year 2023-24, to support the work of the commission, with an additional $18.7 million ongoing. Mr. Kroll has spoken to the adequacy of the funding. I can’t speak to how that relates to how the department currently funds commissions. Obviously, it’s for others to comment on whether they feel that that’s adequate.
I have read the independent report that you mentioned, Senator Pate, and certainly some of the issues that you identify there are, they’re all very important. They touch upon issues that extend beyond Bill C-40 in terms of addressing systemic racism and bias in the criminal justice system. The report talks about prosecutorial discretion. Certainly, there are many things that the government has done and continues to do to try and address some of those issues, whether that be the introduction and then Parliament’s passage of legislation to repeal mandatory minimum penalties, or MMPs, to take concrete steps in addressing over-representation at the bail stage or in administration of justice offences.
Saying that, I appreciate that only scratches the surface of some of the broader concerns that have been identified.
[Translation]
Senator Galvez: Thank you to the witnesses for being here today. I’d like to begin by asking Mr. Williams a question.
[English]
It’s my understanding that the Communications Security Establishment is responsible for keeping the mobile networks that form the backbone for how Canadians communicate but also all the activities, like online banking and communication, everything.
When we try to secure our system, it is easier when we own the system. It’s my understanding that satellites don’t belong to Canada, that we rent. It’s my understanding that we have softswitch rentals, virtual servers and that we pass through the U.K. and the U.S. How can we secure anything if we don’t own these things? What is the percentage of the infrastructure — I understand my colleague talked about electric cars, but I’m talking more about telecommunications because every single transaction we do relies on that — that belongs to Canada and what is the contribution of, for example, banks in bringing this infrastructure here to Canada?
Mr. Williams: Thanks for the question. Maybe just a small point of clarification on that question. We’re not responsible for securing the networks. The telecommunications, the banking industry, they are responsible for securing their respective networks. We protect the Government of Canada’s networks, and that is where our responsibility lies. Within the email that you use here in the Senate, any system that the Government of Canada uses, any of the networks that my colleagues’ departments use, that is where our responsibility lies. Of course, we work very closely with the telecommunications and banking industries to make sure they have the best advice and guidance, access to as much information as they can.
I can say the same is true of the internet. There’s no Canadian part of the internet. The same is true of the U.S. or the U.K. The way information flows now, it never flows the same way twice.
Senator Galvez: Can I just interrupt you. We had Minister Guilbeault the other day, and I asked him about data for analyzing extreme weather events, predicting extreme weather events. He confirmed that we use satellites from around the world. We don’t have our own satellites. We will have construction in 2027 or 2028. So what do we have?
Mr. Williams: I don’t think I’m the right person, unfortunately, to answer that question. First of all, thank you for the question, Mr. Chair. I think there are technical people perhaps from our innovation department and also from our cybersecurity department. I don’t have the insight as to which satellites Canadian companies own. I think some of that would probably be proprietary as well.
That being said, the way information travels, whether it is — again, I’m not an expert on this, but my understanding of the way information travels, whether it’s through cables, through satellite, through land lines, any number of ways, the information travels each time. Regardless of which satellite our information is bouncing off to reach its final destination, it takes a different way each time.
Where the security comes in is on the encryption side of things. Where that resides within Canada is owned by Canadian telecommunications companies, and where the information flows, it gets encrypted on one end and decrypted on the other. There are probably others in my organization that could explain that process a lot better than I can, but Canada is not unique in this perspective.
Senator Galvez: For the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, the same kind of situation. We know that extreme weather events are now becoming a danger for everybody. It’s affecting immigration, migration and security in the Arctic.
What is the progress being made in this area in order to be more informed of these dangers?
Mr. Laliberté: Thank you for the question. I’ll pick up on two pieces to that. You talked about the immigration side. CSIS’s role in that is to provide security assessments and security investigations into individuals who are immigrating to Canada through the Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, or IRCC, programming. There are a number of programs that IRCC has that have temporary residents, permanent residents, citizenship and so on. So CSIS’s role in that is to provide security assessments and advice related to those files.
On the Arctic, that is within CSIS’s mandate as well. It’s a part of Canada, so most definitely part of the national security front. CSIS is working with regional representation in the Arctic through our liaison functions and otherwise to build resiliency in those areas, provide information where possible in order for there to be added national security in those areas.
What I would say is that anything affecting the national security of Canada, CSIS is investigating, analyzing and advising on those, and that would include the Arctic.
[Translation]
Senator Dalphond: My questions are for Mr. Kroll, from the Justice Department. I’d like to follow up on Senator Pate’s questions regarding the new criminal conviction review commission. The budget provides $83 million over 5 years, or $17 million per year. I understand that this amount is already included in your expenditures here. For comparison, what is the current budget of the Criminal Conviction Review Group, or CCRG? The group has a director and a team of lawyers, and uses outside services. Its budget will end once the other begins. How does the CCRG budget compare with the commission budget?
Mr. Kroll: Thank you for the question. I don’t know.
[English]
I don’t know off the top of my head. I apologize.
[Translation]
I will have to get back to you with the answer.
Senator Dalphond: I expected that answer. Could you send us a response in writing? I know the group has a team of more than five lawyers, as well as paralegals and directors, in addition to outside agents. I’d like an idea of the current CCRG operating budget.
[English]
My next question is about legal services. You say in the budget that the operating is about $600 million and the revenues are close to $400 million because you bill the departments. Can you explain how the billing is done? Why is it still $200 million overbudget, in a sense, of what you collect?
Mr. Kroll: The way it works in the system is that the expenses we have that are related to the revenue, they’re netted against the revenue. When you look at the Main Estimates, that first page, you’re seeing a net and essentially the expenses associated with revenue, which shows as a zero.
How does the billing work? Every one of our lawyers and paralegals who bill time to clients record the time that they spend on a client file in what we call the LEX system. It’s a timekeeping system, a case management system. Then, periodically throughout the year, we bill our clients based on the time that has been recorded in the system. It depends on the service that’s being provided. Litigation, for example, is billed on an hourly basis because litigators will serve multiple clients each day, each week. The legal advisory lawyers, so the lawyers who are co-located with our clients in their legal service units, generally, we bill on a full-time equivalent, or FTE, basis, so one amount for the year. Then we have other services like drafting, legislative and regulatory, where we keep time but we don’t bill clients directly. It’s actually included as part of the rate, so everybody pays a little bit whether they use drafting that year or not. That’s how that works.
It’s a significant portion of our operating. Like I said, $442 million in revenue that we bill our clients. That’s representative of the work that we do on behalf of the whole government. Almost everything that the government does has a legal implication, so the Department of Justice provides support in terms of legal advisory throughout the lifespan of a project or a program.
[Translation]
Senator Dalphond: I gather that the $200 million difference between the $613 million and the $400 million in revenue would be more for services that you don’t bill for per se?
Do the billed services cover costs, or does some of the $200 million cover the difference between your costs and what you bill agencies and departments?
Mr. Kroll: No. We actually bill for the amount we spend. The ratio is almost one to one, so there’s no discrepancy.
Senator Dalphond: Do you have a team of people that do the billing?
Mr. Kroll: Yes, there’s a team.
Senator Dalphond: How many people are involved in the invoicing process?
Mr. Kroll: I don’t know the exact number, but I’d say about 10 to 15 people working for the department.
Senator Dalphond: Thank you.
[English]
Senator MacAdam: My question is for Statistics Canada. Last fall, Statistics Canada appeared before this committee on the Main Estimates, and we were told that Statistics Canada was approved for the Census of Environment, and this provided $25.6 million over five years starting in 2021-22 with $5.8 million ongoing. It was mentioned that it was the first time that Statistics Canada will have an ecosystem of the environment of Canada, and it was a priority for Statistics Canada.
I’m wondering if you can provide an update on the progress to fill the data gaps regarding statistics on the environment.
Ms. Mitchell: Yes, thank you for the question, Mr. Chair.
I did talk about that last year when appearing before this group, and the Census of Environment is a priority. What the Census of Environment is measuring is ecosystems — forests, mountains, prairies, tundra, lakes, rivers, oceans and coastal areas as well as cities and towns, so part of our nation’s wealth and biodiversity.
In terms of some progress that we’ve made, data and geospatial data and tools are made accessible through the Census of Environment on our website, and connections are made to other platforms such as Open Data and Open Maps. The program will meet the need for indicators to support the Global Biodiversity Framework, Sustainable Development Goals and Statistics Canada’s Quality of Life Statistics Program.
That’s the information I have with me now. If you have a specific question, I’m happy to get back to you.
Senator MacAdam: No, I was just wondering what kind of progress is being made with regard to those statistics.
Again for Statistics Canada, your departmental plan recognizes that the data landscape is becoming more complex, and, therefore, education and data literacy are key to helping Canadians make sense of it all. I wonder if you could, first, speak to the resources being allocated to some of your engagement initiatives in this regard; and, secondly, how much work is being done by Statistics Canada on creating or generating analytics, in other words, explaining or interpreting the data sets versus showing raw data?
Ms. Mitchell: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, for the questions.
I don’t have an answer to your specific question on the amount of resources we spend on engagement. We have a number of priorities in terms of engaging with our stakeholders — so Canadians, the media, our researchers, other stakeholders and federal departments as well.
In terms of analytics, we do publish several analytical studies every year, and we also provide — in collaboration with the Canada School of Public Service — some learning opportunities on data literacy and data management. We also have a group that is across the country in all of our different regional offices that meets directly with stakeholders to look at data priorities and provide advice on the data we do have at Statistics Canada and how to answer the questions that we are trying to answer.
Senator MacAdam: Are you satisfied with the amount of interpretation that is being provided or do you think Statistics Canada should be doing more in this area?
Ms. Mitchell: There are a number of important organizations that are involved in data. Statistics Canada is not the only organization, and we do work with our federal, provincial and territorial partnerships and also with other federal departments that have very important data holdings that Canadians need to have access to as well. It is definitely a partnership.
We could always be doing more. Usually it comes out through our consultation on where we need to focus our efforts in terms of engagement with Canadians.
Senator MacAdam: Thank you.
Senator Kingston: Welcome, everybody. My questions are for Statistics Canada and Ms. Mitchell.
Before I start, I would like to ask you a question arising from one of your answers, and that is, what is website scraping?
Ms. Mitchell: Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair.
Statistics Canada is carefully experimenting with new technologies. One of the main purposes is to reduce the burden on our respondents. Our respondents are businesses and Canadians.
We have experimented with — I’m not the technical expert — but robots that scrape prices from the internet for different types of providers as we look at the different data needs and how to integrate it, but we always do that in a very careful way in terms of adopting those automated tools.
Senator Kingston: So fact checking?
Ms. Mitchell: We do have one portion that we focus on that is called Just the Facts, and so we publish the facts about different data priorities, and we would like to go into more of a real-time fact-checker as well.
Senator Kingston: I’m looking at your departmental plan, and you talk about monitoring emerging challenges and opportunities for 2024-25.
I’m wondering which challenges you were focusing on this year and looking forward to the next?
Ms. Mitchell: Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair.
One of the technologies that we are experimenting with is a chatbot, and so we have three that are underway, testing it for use, hopefully, in the 2026 Census of Population but also on our other tools so that Canadians can ask us questions directly. We are experimenting. That’s one of the pieces.
Statistics Canada also moved its infrastructure to cloud infrastructure, so it allows an opportunity to access other tools that are available only on the cloud.
Senator Kingston: My next question has to do with artificial intelligence, or AI, because you have actually set out a box in your departmental plan talking about AI. You have talked about a couple of things that I believe fit in that category. Are there more things, as you work up to the 2026 census, that you are honing, using more or introducing?
Ms. Mitchell: Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the question.
One item to mention is that Statistics Canada is adopting these modern technologies for our own organization and improving the way we do our work, but we are also measuring the impact of AI in Canada as well. We look at it from two components: How is AI changing Canadians and businesses, but for ourselves specifically, I talked about the chatbots. We are also doing some work with machine learning, hopefully to help us with our translation and communications products. That’s another example.
Senator Kingston: Machine learning? I wonder what the definition on that is.
Ms. Mitchell: I’m not a specialist on machine learning. I am the Chief Financial Officer, but I know that we have had a few projects approved to experiment with machine learning. It basically takes a large volume of data and produces some insights from it, but that’s about the extent of my knowledge of machine learning.
Senator Kingston: You have led into the last thing for this round, and that is that you speak about the risk that Statistics Canada may be further affected by potential loss of revenues from cost-recovery surveys and analysis, mainly — and this is why I am interested — in relation to the agency’s social programs if federal partners adjust their spending as a result of government-wide reduction exercises.
Can you can speak a little bit to that?
Ms. Mitchell: Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair. About one fifth of Statistics Canada’s funding comes from cost-recovery revenues which mostly come from federal departments. We do have other levels of government and academia as well, but it’s mostly federal departments. This has been a normal operation for Statistics Canada. We do monitor it very closely. When there is austerity in the federal government, there is a dip in cost-recovery revenues, but this does happen from time to time so we are monitoring it very closely.
In terms of how programs are funded — I’m not sure it would be genesis — most of the economic programs, so the economic indicators, are through the Main Estimates. Some of the social statistical programs are costed through cost recovery. It does allow us to be very responsive to our federal departments that have that social policy to be able to meet their data needs as well, but we do monitor very closely.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you. Surely, you have many machine learning specialists in your department.
My question is for the Communications Security Establishment. I see a specific expenditure this year for providing and protecting information, in the amount of $19,849,000. You’ve forecast it for 2024, 2025 and 2026. This item wasn’t forecast in the past. Can you explain why you’ve made it a separate item? Certainly, it’s something you did before, because I can’t I imagine you didn’t have such an expenditure. Why did you separate it this year in particular?
Mr. Kroll: Thank you for the question. I’ll give the floor to Ms. Chassé.
Julie Chassé, Associate Chief Financial Officer, Communications Security Establishment: Good morning. Your question concerns the $19.8 million vote.
The Chair: Exactly.
Ms. Chassé: It corresponds to a respending authority, called vote-netted revenue. It was previously in our items, so it’s not new, but it’s mainly for the top secret Canadian intelligence system, the IT system. We’re responsible for running this system and invoicing other departments for its operation in context. It’s actually a cost recovery mechanism, as my colleague explained earlier. Since we’re responsible for running the system, we’re also authorized to bill the departments for system support and operations. That’s why it’s a separate line.
The Chair: When you supply information, is it accounted for? I’d like to understand the information-providing process. I know that how you share information is something that’s come up lately.
Ms. Chassé: We’re responsible for running the top secret communication system for the Government of Canada. To give the departments access to the system, we have a billing formula, so we invoice per user most of the time. If you have x number of users, the invoice is based on the number of users, and that provides the funding.
The Chair: The RCMP would be one of the ones with access. Is that right?
Ms. Chassé: Exactly.
The Chair: The Parliamentary Protective Service?
Ms. Chassé: My colleagues here.
The Chair: How does it work when you provide the information?
I’ll give you my personal experience. In 2013, I received information about an at-risk individual in my circle, so that I could take action. I wasn’t asked to get secret clearance for that. I was given the information and I was then able to act. How do you go about passing on or sharing that kind of critical information with groups or individuals? You can’t be requiring top secret clearance from them every time you need to provide information. How do you do it? I know how you did things in 2013 because I was given that information, but how do you operate now?
Mr. Williams: Thank you for the question. It’s a very important question, especially these days.
There are several ways. A team that reports to me will access the top secret information. There is a process for identifying facts or words that we call “a form of words.” I’m going to switch to English, because I think it will be easier for me to explain.
[English]
We look to lower the classification as much as possible to share. That can be from above top secret, down to top secret, to secret, to protected B, to unclassified, depending on the audience. There is a whole process to do that to eliminate any information that might get insight to where, how or who that information is from. Sometimes the information might come from a partner. To do that process, it might involve consulting with an international partner, a domestic partner, to put it through the process that everyone is satisfied that the words that will be used to share that information do not breach any capabilities, assets or equities that our organization or any of our partner organizations have.
[Translation]
The Chair: Say the name of a person at risk in my organization comes up. That name can be provided, then?
Mr. Williams: Yes, it can. There’s one thing to note.
[English]
My organization, the Communications Security Establishment, is forbidden at directing our activities at Canadians anywhere in the world or anyone in Canada. So that question might be better directed at our law enforcement agencies. We are a foreign intelligence agency. We cannot direct our activities at Canadians. If it’s a name of a Canadian, we most likely would not be involved in that case.
[Translation]
The Chair: In that type of situation, the information would be shared with the Parliamentary Protective Service or parliamentarians, for example, who would then inform us. Is that right?
Mr. Williams: Yes.
The Chair: Perfect. That’s what happened with me in 2013.
Mr. Williams: Yes. If we receive information that includes details about a Canadian, we protect it before a report is released, for instance. People who need the information can request it. If they have a right to it, there is a process to follow.
The Chair: Perfect.
[English]
Senator Marshall: My next question is for Mr. Laliberté. There have been a couple of incidents in the media lately regarding individuals who were able to get into Canada, and it is now questionable whether they should have been. I do want to focus specifically on the two cases, but what I’m interested in is, a lot of the work that has been done to determine when people are eligible to come to Canada must be carried out outside of the country. I know there are interviews that would be conducted in other countries. How do you ensure the integrity of the individuals who are conducting work on individuals who wanted to come to Canada? Not only the individuals, but also the work they do that — there are two aspects to it. How do you ensure the integrity to ensure that the work is being done above board?
Mr. Laliberté: Just for clarity on the question, Mr. Chair, the integrity of the CSIS side of the screening process, is that what you are referring to?
Senator Marshall: Yes.
Mr. Laliberté: Thank you for the question. Perhaps to specify CSIS’s role in this because we are one piece to this process. We advise in the cases that you’re referring to, individuals who are applying to immigrate to Canada through IRCC. They would send the file over to CSIS and CSIS then uses its equities to assess whether there is any adverse information or intelligence to provide to IRCC as a form of advice as it relates to the security clearance for the individual coming in.
Senator Marshall: The work that CSIS does, is it carried out by your own employees, and therefore you have direct control? Is it contracted out? Is it done by somebody within another department? Is it all people within your own organization?
Mr. Laliberté: It’s all employees who are within our control who have enhanced top-secret security clearances themselves who do this work, yes.
Senator Marshall: This question is for Statistics Canada.
When you are doing surveys and the census, some information is mandatory. People have to provide it. Other information is not mandatory.
Do you notice there is a difference in recent years with regard to people being free with information? Do you find people are more hesitant to provide information? I know Mr. Williams is sitting next to you, and he is interested in cybercrime. I would like to know, in anticipation of the next census, are you noticing a decline in people’s eagerness to participate and provide information to you?
Then can you tell us what kind of security you provide over that information and whether you share it with Canada Revenue Agency, or CRA?
Ms. Mitchell: Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair.
The census is our largest program that is mandatory. The short form, which most Canadians receive, is mandatory, and the long form as well. We’ve just finished consultation on changes that occur; that will be going to cabinet at some point for approval.
It’s an important program which sets the base for —
Senator Marshall: I only have a few minutes.
I want to know is there is a decline in people’s eagerness to participate and also this issue with the Canada Revenue Agency?
Ms. Mitchell: What we are seeing with the census response rates is the online response is quite high across the world. We work hard at a thorough communication plan to ensure Canadians know when the census is and the importance of it. We have staff across the country that does try to connect with every dwelling to provide the opportunity for Canadians to answer the census questionnaire.
We receive data from the CRA. We don’t provide data back to the CRA. Statistics Canada, similar to my security partners here, removes the identifier. Protecting the sensitive information of Canadians is a priority for Statistics Canada. We do ensure that.
Senator Marshall: For the Department of Justice, I know you provided information to Senator Dalphond. There is a transfer payment of $541 million. What is that?
Mr. Kroll: Thank you for the question.
That $541 million represents all of the grants and contributions programs that the Department of Justice has. There is a long list of them, criminal legal aid —
Senator Marshall: No revenue connected to that.
Mr. Kroll: Yes.
Senator Marshall: Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Forest: Mr. Williams, your mandate is to ensure the cybersecurity of communications in Canada. Municipalities have dealt with a number of major issues. The town of Montmagny and the regional county municipality of Mékinac were subjected to ransomware attacks. Do your services support municipalities in dealing with that? They’re not equipped to handle those threats. Do you provide guidance or documentation? Do you work with the Union des municipalités du Québec or the Federation of Canadian Municipalities?
Mr. Williams: Thank you for your question.
The commitment is there, but we should be doing more. It’s the same with the provinces and territories. The federal government has done a good job of protecting itself. We block an average of 6.6 billion instances of attempted threat activity a day, and that’s just against the Canadian government. That said, provinces and municipalities are attractive targets to our adversaries. It would be difficult to engage with all municipalities, given how many there are, so we meet with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities.
The same goes for energy companies. There are many of them, so we try to meet with associations that represent a number of them, so that they can share information with each other.
Our partnership team is growing, and we’re trying to do more.
The good thing about cybersecurity information advisories is that they apply to everyone, most of the time. Whether you’re responsible for a company, a municipality, a library or anything else, the steps will be the same. We post information daily on our website and social network accounts, and provide easy steps for Canadians and IT professionals alike to protect their networks.
The Chair: That makes sense with respect to computers, telecommunications, cybersecurity and cyberattacks. But when it comes to drinking water, is there any training on infrastructure security?
Mr. Williams: We do what we can. We’re willing to meet with the heads of Canadian organizations responsible for critical infrastructure services such as drinking water. We’ve had meetings with some suppliers. I’m sure more needs to be done.
Senator Forest: Actually, I wanted to discuss critical infrastructure. We know that those who launch cyberattacks are becoming more and more creative, so your services need to constantly be on the cutting edge of technology. Are there any communication channels that can quickly transfer this know-how to address the many IT and critical infrastructure threats across the country?
Mr. Williams: Thanks for the question. We offer several services. One of them is called AdvIntel, and it’s automated. As soon as we discover a potential threat incident, it’s entered into our system. Those who subscribe to the service receive the information directly and automatically.
Another service is CIRA’s Canadian Shield. It’s free for Canadians. The information is drawn from our own. Anything that’s not classified and can be shared is there. We recommend that all Canadians visit the CIRA website and install it on their phone before using it.
We also have a new service: pre-ransomware notifications. That means we have information that there will be malicious activity on a Canadian network. I don’t know the exact number, but we’ve issued around 250 notifications before a ransomware attack on a Canadian network.
Senator Forest: We’re currently live. Can you provide the address of the website where Canadians can register?
Mr. Williams: The Canadian Centre for Cyber Security’s website is cyber.gc.ca. For Canadians, it’s getcybersafe.gc.ca.
The Chair: Excellent. You’re doing a better job than the minister who appeared on “Tout le monde en parle” this past weekend.
[English]
Senator Smith: My question is for CSIS and Mr. Laliberté.
Given the unique nature of the work that CSIS does, there are some restrictions on who you can hire, as well as limitations on telework. Are these risks impacting your ability to hire and retain the necessary staff?
Could you also provide an update on the progress of the Employee Retention and Attraction, or ERA, plan introduced in late 2023? How has it impacted your ability to attract and retain talent so far?
Mr. Laliberté: Thank you for the question. It is a good question.
I will start with our staffing and attraction. We do have limitations on where employees can work given the nature of our work. We need to work out of top-secret infrastructure we have built across the country and the world. We are limited in terms of that footprint. We are also limited in terms of the types of technologies that can be used within that infrastructure to make sure we keep Canada’s secrets safe.
Having said that, we have, over the recent years, hired the most individuals in our history. Recent investments by the government have resulted in monies that we were able to use to augment our staffing complement. I can confirm that we’re now in a healthy space as it relates to our staffing complement.
We find with the new employees onboarding a great appeal. We tend to attract individuals who have a fire in their belly for the mandate of keeping Canadians safe. I can attest when working with these employees, you feel it every single day. I feel, on that front, we’re making great headway.
On the employee retention and attraction strategy, a lot of what you’re seeing in terms of having the individuals starting with us are the result of the items identified within our strategy. We still have work to do, including offering additional tool sets. As you can imagine, employees starting may want to work with modern tools and so on. We’re attempting to do that in a secure infrastructure and keep our employees’ information safe while offering employees an exciting place to work. I’ll limit it to that unless you have a specific question.
Senator Smith: I’ll sneak in an extra question. What specific measures are being implemented under the ERA program to improve work-life balance and flexibility for employees who cannot telework due to security restrictions?
Mr. Laliberté: That’s an excellent question. Certainly, some of the metrics we look for is the outside-of-the-box flexibility we’re able to offer, for example, work hours being flexible when people can complete their important work. We’re also offering, despite there being a very distinct footprint on where our employees can work across the country, flexibility on where people can do their work as it relates to where typical work was done.
For example, in the past, we might have a job that was limited to a distinct headquarters. You had to live in Ottawa, and basically, there was no way around that. We have expanded our remote work, which, for us, is working out of another jurisdiction, essentially. This has provided flexibility for employees who, for personal reasons, might want to work in a different part of the country. One of the metrics I’m looking for is how flexible we are for our employees in terms of offering them different places to work.
Attrition rates are also a good metric for me. We are experiencing our lowest attrition rate now as it relates to the turnover of the employee base.
Senator Smith: Thank you.
Senator Osler: My question is for Communications Security Establishment Canada. I understand that as Canada’s national cybersecurity and foreign intelligence agency, you’re authorized to assist federal partners, but health care and the public health sector are increasingly becoming a cybersecurity target. Health care in Canada primarily falls under provincial jurisdiction.
Does CSE liaise with other provincial partners to help keep the health care sector safe and secure in Canada?
[Translation]
Mr. Williams: Thanks for the question.
[English]
In short, yes, 100%. We do so usually through engagement with chief information officers for provincial governments. That being said, in some cases we’ve actually gone over and above just consulting. We were able to provide direct assistance to Newfoundland and Labrador when they were compromised within their health system a couple years back. This went beyond just giving advice and guidance. This was actually deploying personnel to help re-establish services for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
A big part of cybersecurity is your resilience, your ability to bounce back. Cybercrime is increasing. We see the most profitable organizations falling victim to cybercrime on an almost daily basis. It’s all about your ability to make sure you’re well set up, so should the awful happen, you can get back on your feet as quickly as possible.
Senator Osler: You say you liaise with the chief information officers, the provincial ones?
Mr. Williams: The provincial ones, yes. On top of that, we were heavily involved in protecting the rollout of the vaccines during the pandemic, the federal government’s work with the provinces in rolling that out.
Senator Osler: Thank you.
Senator Pate: Thank you. My question is, again, for Mr. Kroll.
As you know, despite efforts of criminal prison law reform, some of which were mentioned by your colleague Mr. Taylor — thank you for that — the proportion of Indigenous peoples, in particular Indigenous women, continues to increase in federal prisons. This trajectory has continued on the upswing since the implementation of the Calls to Action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada in 2015. One of those calls was that there be the elimination of the over-representation of Indigenous peoples in 10 years, which would be 2025, next year.
I’m interested in what details you can provide regarding funding that’s been allocated within the Department of Justice to prioritize this goal, in particular for Indigenous women, and what concrete steps are being taken to ensure that these numbers decrease, in particular any new strategies that might be considered given all the measures that are continuing that seem to actually be feeding rather than abating the mass incarceration of Indigenous peoples.
Further to Senator Dalphond’s question, in that costing, if you could include all of the subcontracts for investigations, including police and private investigations, as well as private legal analyses, that would be great. There’s quite a web of contracts that go out from that department, to my knowledge, based on discussions I’ve had in the past.
Mr. Kroll: I’m not sure I will have all of the details you’re looking for, but yes, over-representation continues to be an issue. The department is tackling it through a number of different initiatives, including the development of our Indigenous justice strategy, investing in the family information liaison units and working on Gladue reports. There are a lot of front-end programs that are in place to help address over-representation and the fairness of the justice system. We’re also heavily involved in legal aid, which is, as I’m sure you’re aware, a shared responsibility between the provinces and territories, for example, making sure we have adequate legal representation to support individuals who are involved in the legal system. Then, as we discussed, the criminal conviction review commission also serves to right past injustices. Those are a number of programs that are aimed at addressing this Call to Action, among others.
In terms of contracts that go out, I’m not sure what you’re referring to. I’m not aware of a lot of contracts that go out. Frankly, I’m not even sure which investigations you might be referring to.
Senator Pate: Sorry, that point was in response to wrongful convictions and the investigations that have to happen as a result of those.
Mr. Kroll: Okay.
Senator Pate: If you can’t provide this today, please provide them in writing. I’m interested in the concrete measures and factors that are being followed in terms of ensuring this objective, to be reached by 2025, is on track and how much money has been allocated in what sectors.
Mr. Kroll: We can certainly take that away and provide a more detailed response for you.
Senator Pate: Thank you.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you very much.
[English]
Senator Galvez: My question is for Statistics Canada. We have discussed the importance of unbiased information in good quality data. We have not talked about what Statistics Canada is doing to help take informed decisions to Canadians. Also, if it’s on time, at the right time so that we can be efficient in that.
Looking, for example, at your data on climate change statistics, I find them very static. There is no evolution in time, and there is no relation to other things. For example, planet warming has caused extreme weather events which affect health, security and affordability. I think you have the data already, and this is very important.
We have other crises, such as biodiversity loss. When I see your percentage of Canadian towns and cities classed as green, and I have a little asterisk defining that, it gives the impression that we are doing fine because 82% of Canadians see these are green.
Are you looking into how to relate other things so the picture is evolving with time so we see improvement and if it’s in relation to other things that are happening to Canadians so that they can make informed decisions based on the evidence you have provided?
Ms. Mitchell: Thank you for the question. I already had the opportunity to talk about the Census of Environment. The environment is a priority for this government and also for Statistics Canada.
Specifically on your data questions on climate change, I’m not familiar with the data themselves. I’m happy to take your specific question back.
We have two frameworks, one which is internationally recognized, the Sustainable Development Goals, and also the Quality of Life Framework. In terms of the Quality of Life Framework, it’s a series of indicators that we’re collecting that go beyond the economic indicators. Countries compare their gross domestic product, or GDP, but the quality of life of a citizen goes beyond the economic indicator and has other factors such as justice, health and environment. We’re newer in our journey on the Quality of Life Framework. That’s something I wanted to share with you, but if you had specific questions, we have a team.
Senator Galvez: When would they be put out?
Ms. Mitchell: The quality of life indicators are published regularly on a specific calendar. It’s a hub on our website. We regularly publish indicators on the outcomes of Canadians in terms of different aspects. We can always improve in terms of the focus on climate change as well.
Senator Galvez: Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Dalphond: My questions are for Mr. Kroll and have to do with contributions. There are contributions for legal aid for refugees and immigrants. They totalled $62 million in 2022-23. They now stand at $11,500,000, which is what they were last year. Did the $62 million represent previous contributions that hadn’t been paid?
Mr. Kroll: Thank you for the question. It’s a program that varies from year to year. Our base budget is $11 million, but every year we ask the government for an increase. For example, this year we’re asking for additional funding to be able to serve all program users.
I’d like to come back to one of your earlier questions, because I think I misunderstood it. It was a question about the gap between the $600 million and the $400 million. The gap is due to the fact that our legal services are funded by a main budget as well as net revenues. Total expenditure was therefore $600 million.
[English]
The estimates included the appropriation acts are the difference there. Part of it is voted by Parliament. That’s our Main Estimates. We call it the net Main Estimates. Then the other part is included in other departments’ Main Estimates, and that’s the amount that we invoice them.
[Translation]
Perhaps I understood your question better.
[English]
Senator Dalphond: To summarize, you allowed $230 million. You knew your cost would be $600 million, and then you bill the departments for $400 million?
Mr. Kroll: Exactly.
Senator Dalphond: That’s how you make the calculation.
Mr. Kroll: That’s right.
Senator Dalphond: My next question is about immigration. You say it’s $11.5 million, which is indicated on the Main Estimates, but there would be supplementary estimates because I don’t think the number of refugees or claimants has diminished in any way.
Mr. Kroll: No.
Senator Dalphond: So we expect $60 million, more or less the same thing this year or do you expect it to be even more?
Mr. Kroll: I do not know exactly the amount off the top of my head, but it will not be the same as last year, and it will be significantly more than $11.5 million.
Senator Dalphond: Two years ago, it was $60 million. Are you telling me it’s going to be over $60 million? I’m trying to understand what your crystal ball is saying. Will it be roughly around the same number or are we going to go way up?
Mr. Kroll: We are in the process of submitting that request, so I can’t say how much we’re requesting at this point.
Senator Dalphond: You cannot say, but I’m sure you’re not blind about what’s coming up.
Mr. Kroll: Absolutely not, no.
Senator MacAdam: My question is for Statistics Canada. Your departmental plan mentions that modernization is a key priority, that Statistics Canada is focused on improving the quality of the data you release and giving itself the means to do so in a modern and efficient manner. The departmental plan also recognizes that as the pace of environmental change continues to accelerate, Statistics Canada must be equipped to keep up.
This past April, the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development tabled a report on the federal government’s plastic waste reduction strategy. The report indicates there was a three-year and three-month lag in plastic waste data availability from Statistics Canada, which means the next annual report expected in March 2024 will present data only up to 2020.
Can you speak to why there is this lag in data and the barriers to achieving more real-time, accurate data? What are some of the ways you might be allocating resources towards adapting methods to improve the pace and availability of data?
Ms. Mitchell: Thank you for the question. I’m going to have to get back to you on that. I don’t have that information with me. Our partner, Environment and Climate Change Canada is the lead, and we’re definitely partners with them working on a plan, but I don’t know the specific answer to your question so we’ll get back to you on the timing of data release.
In terms of the methods we’re experimenting with, I mentioned to another honourable senator that we’ve adopted cloud technology, using AI and machine learning to be able to modernize the way we produce and collect information for Canadians, but I’ll get back to you on your specific question.
Senator MacAdam: Thank you.
Senator Kingston: My question again is for Ms. Mitchell. I’m looking at your strategic priorities, and you have one for informing health care. You speak in that about the Canadian Dental Care Plan. Now that Bill C-64 has gotten Royal Assent and there is a committee of experts that’s being struck in the near future, do you have any plans or are you now making plans to support that committee of experts much as you speak of what you’ve done for the Canada dental plan?
Ms. Mitchell: I don’t know the specific answer to your question, but I can get back to you. We work very closely with Health Canada; they’re one of our main partners. I can get back to you on that.
Senator Kingston: If you can in writing, that would be great because it hopefully will move along quickly.
[Translation]
The Chair: I have some questions about the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and Communications Security Establishment Canada. I see that your two budgets combined amount to about $1.4 or $1.5 billion. I’ve compared them with England’s budgets for MI5, MI6 and the other organization whose name I forget. I did the math. In Canadian dollars, the budgets would amount to over $6.4 billion. There was an issue in the spring over a decrease in their budget, but at $6.4 billion, there may have been some leeway. That’s four times more than is spent in Canada. Do you have enough resources to ensure you can effectively fulfill your mandates and minimize risks, especially in comparison with other members of the Five Eyes?
Mr. Laliberté: I can start. The structure of organizations varies slightly from country to country.
[English]
Doing a one for one may not be as precise. Having said that, there is a different sort of scale as it relates to the threat environment.
I can speak for the CSIS side. We prioritize on a very regular basis based on the resources we receive on an annual basis. We have a very regular exercise on making sure we maximize the money we get from Parliament and then reallocating based on the threat environment. As you can appreciate, that could evolve very rapidly, so we do that on a regular basis. That prioritization exercise is a very important part of ensuring that we maximize our spend.
[Translation]
The Chair: Prioritization means you leave out things you consider to be less of a priority. That creates risk.
Mr. Laliberté: Maybe so, but prioritizing also means that some things are more important than others.
[English]
The threat environment ebbs and flows. There may be situations that are lower risk, so we would deprioritize that particular line of work and reprioritize areas where the risk level may go up. I do take your point. At the end of the day, national security has it that there are going to be risks emanating from many areas.
I can say CSIS and Canada has experienced an increase in the threat environment on a number of fronts, more recently foreign interference, as you’re very well aware of. The violent extremism is an area that we prioritize and ensure we have resource coverage.
I guess what I would leave the committee with is we have a robust process internally to ensure we’re always analyzing risks and that we understand that trade-off very well when allocating our resources.
[Translation]
Mr. Williams: Thank you for the question, although it’s somewhat risky for a civil servant. I noted in my opening remarks two major investments in the CSE, in the 2022 and 2024 budgets. Our organization is growing quickly. Last year, we hired 460 new employees. That number takes into account a retirement and retention decrease of less than 4%. We’re growing very quickly, and we’re aiming to hire another 400 people this year. The growth rate at the CSE is pretty incredible. We’re well positioned with our budget to deliver on our mandate.
The Chair: You’re hiring more staff. I’d imagine technology is also changing so you’re investing in your efficiency there. We often talk about artificial intelligence —that’s the buzzword — but do the systems in place make it possible to be more efficient and avoid human tasks?
Mr. Williams: That’s a good question. It’s true, and we work with our partners to find efficiencies in government purchasing so as not to duplicate our cybersecurity efforts. We work as a team, because we’re in a much better position to defend the government when we work together.
The Chair: Thank you. We have four minutes left.
[English]
Senator Marshall: For Mr. Williams, the Auditor General released a report maybe last year or a couple of years ago where she said that a lot of these systems, the IT systems within government, were old and at risk of collapsing. I notice in your annual report that there’s a section there where you worked with Shared Services Canada and Treasury Board to protect the IT assets of the Government of Canada. Those assets are pretty old.
Do you have any comments on that? That must be a very challenging aspect to your work. Are you willing to risk any comment on that?
Mr. Williams: I don’t think I’m super well placed to speak about the age or the effectiveness. I’m not a technical person. I will say we have an excellent partnership with Shared Services and Treasury Board specifically, the chief information officer there. The Shared Services construct actually provides the Government of Canada an advantage that many of our partners might not have in so much as all of the internet gateways go through Shared Services Canada, and therefore it allows us much more reduced points of contact with the internet, which allows us to be able to defend Government of Canada networks — the envy, frankly, of many of our partners. Our host-based systems and our network-based systems are cloud-based systems that use machine learning, AI and all of the other keywords you’ve heard today to automatedly defend against those 6.6 billion malicious attempts we face per day against the Government of Canada.
I would leave it to others to speak to the age. I will say that our cybersecurity at the Government of Canada is world-class.
Senator Marshall: Thank you very much.
Senator Pate: Mr. Kroll, another one for you. The 2024-25 Departmental Plan for the Department of Justice emphasizes youth, Black and Indigenous justice strategies, yet policies such as the recent increasingly punitive measures respecting auto theft in Bill C-69 continue to be pursued — this despite awareness that it is young, poor and racialized people who will be disproportionately targeted by these measures, not those profiting from auto theft at the highest levels and certainly not targeting car manufacturers who have the ability to address this issue.
Could you please explain the department’s procedures for determining how to prioritize funding requests and how they have allowed for a measure such as this that runs at cross purposes to the department’s overarching other justice strategies?
Mr. Kroll: Thank you for the question. I don’t think I’m best placed to answer that question. I can speak to generally how we prioritize funding requests, but I may ask one of my colleagues to come up and provide precision to your question.
When it comes to funding requests, just like every other department, we have to balance various priorities against limited resources. That’s exactly how we approach it. We set our priorities, which are outlined in the departmental plan, and we do our best to align our limited resources to achieve those. But different information comes to light and different priorities and strategies sometimes will change where we invest those dollars.
I’ll turn to my colleague, Ms. Sargent, who may be able to add some more.
Laurie Sargent, Assistant Deputy Minister, Indigenous Rights and Relations Portfolio, Department of Justice Canada: Laurie Sargent here, Justice Canada, Assistant Deputy Minister of Indigenous Rights and Relations Portfolio. I really wanted to emphasize that there has been a very strong commitment to, for example, the work that my team is doing in relation to the Indigenous justice strategy that we’re currently in the process of developing — a relatively modest amount, but investments in Budget 2024 to allow my team to continue working with Indigenous partners, supporting them as well in relation to Indigenous justice. The strategy is yet to be fully launched.
I just want to acknowledge that the department is seeking to be responsive to what we’re hearing from Indigenous peoples and also what we’re hearing from provinces and territories. I know our minister and the Minister of Public Safety were in Yellowknife last weekend at a federal-provincial-territorial and Indigenous meeting where they discussed all of the priorities that we’ve talked about today, including questions about bail, safety, auto theft, et cetera, but also investments that are needed in Indigenous justice. Of course, there is much more work to be done, but certainly investments have been made concretely to develop a strategy that brings Indigenous perspectives to justice, which we hope in the longer term will address the over-representation that you have flagged. Thank you.
Senator Dalphond: My last question is for Mr. Kroll again. For the contributions for legal aid services in both official languages support fund, you have an increase of over 30% this year, from $12 million to $16 million. Are we seeing more problems than last year about access in both official languages?
Mr. Kroll: Thank you for the question. I would not say that we are seeing more problems. When we put these proposals together, we map out how we can ramp up programs over the years. What you’re seeing here is just a function of that plan.
I keep coming back to your previous questions. Excuse me. I am reminded that Budget 2024 did allocate additional immigration and refugee legal aid funding in the amount of $273 million over five years and $43.5 million ongoing. So that’s recognition that, as you noted, our immigration and refugee legal aid requirements continue to increase.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you very much. That concludes our meeting this morning. I’d like to thank the witnesses for appearing today and for their frank answers. I would like to remind them to please submit their written answers to the clerk by the end of the day on Tuesday, November 5, 2024.
Before we end, I’d like to remind senators that our next meeting will be tomorrow, October 23, at 6:45 p.m., with the Auditor General of Canada. That will be interesting.
Before adjourning the meeting, I’d like to thank the entire support team of this committee, the staff, the analysts, the interpreters, the stenographers, our clerk and our pages. Thank you for your excellent work, see you tomorrow.
(The committee adjourned.)