<\/p>\n
Canada\u2019s privacy commissioner is vowing to find out more about a surveillance program that collects data without a warrant on communications by Canadians.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n And opposition MPs are raising questions about its legality and demanding that Defence Minister Peter MacKay explain why he approved it.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n \u201cWhen it comes to the metadata program, we know very little specific information at this point \u2013 but we want to find out more,\u201d Scott Hutchinson, of the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, said in an e-mail.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n Two years ago, Mr. MacKay approved the renewal of a classified surveillance program that exists in a legal grey area because it collects Canadian Internet and phone data trails \u2013 so-called metadata \u2013 as part of its efforts to look at telecommunications patterns throughout the wider world.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n The question is whether this adds up to illegal spying on Canadian citizens.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n \u201cAre the Conservatives monitoring the phone and e-mail records of Canadians, yes or no?\u201d Opposition Leader Thomas Mulcair asked Monday during Question Period.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n Mr. MacKay responded to these and other questions by saying Ottawa\u2019s surveillance initiative \u201cis specifically prohibited from looking at the information of Canadians\u201d and that \u201cthis is foreign intelligence.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n \u201cThis is something that has been happening for years,\u201d Mr. MacKay said.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n On Monday, a Globe and Mail story outlined the contours of Canada\u2019s metadata-collection program, which is handled by an electronic-eavesdropping agency known as the Communications Security Establishment Canada.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n Formed during the Cold War to spy on Communist states, CSEC is typically banned from any spying on Canadian citizens.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n Yet, like other spy agencies, it now draws a legal distinction between the actual conversations, which are considered privileged, and the metadata surrounding them, which are not.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n As the thinking goes, phone numbers, Internet Protocol addresses, and \u201crouting\u201d information can be considered legal to intercept, regardless of their point of origin, as long as government technicians don\u2019t actually eavesdrop on citizens\u2019 actual conversation or read their e-mails.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n The hope is that the analysis of mass-collected material can help governments zero in on networks of foreign-based adversaries. But such techniques raise obvious questions about how much domestic surveillance ought to be permitted. Documents leaked last week, for example, show that a U.S. spy agency has compelled an American phone company to cough up the \u201ctelephony metadata\u201d of millions of American customers \u2013 daily.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n It\u2019s not clear how CSEC acquires metadata. But it has been given permission from officials in Ottawa to dredge up some Canadian material.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n It has been almost a decade since this spy agency \u2013 which operates under ministerial authority \u2013 first sought legal cover for its metadata-mining efforts. Liberal defence minister Bill Graham signed the first CSEC metadata directive in 2005. Mr. MacKay signed the directive authorizing a renewed program in 2011.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n Parliamentarians, who are never apprised of the mechanics of electronic surveillance programs, say they want to get up to speed.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n \u201cFirst of all, I\u2019d like to see a copy of the directive that was given by the minister in 2011. That at least would clarify some things,\u201d said NDP MP Jack Harris, who put questions about the program to the minister during Question Period.<\/span><\/p>\n