The hon. member may know it is not the business of the House to deal with leadership issues of the different parties. I understand what the hon. member is trying to say, but try to keep it to the legislation.
Marco Mendicino Liberal
Second reading (Senate), as of June 19, 2024
Subscribe to a feed (what's a feed?) of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill C-26.
This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.
Part 1 amends the Telecommunications Act to add the promotion of the security of the Canadian telecommunications system as an objective of the Canadian telecommunications policy and to authorize the Governor in Council and the Minister of Industry to direct telecommunications service providers to do anything, or refrain from doing anything, that is necessary to secure the Canadian telecommunications system. It also establishes an administrative monetary penalty scheme to promote compliance with orders and regulations made by the Governor in Council and the Minister of Industry to secure the Canadian telecommunications system as well as rules for judicial review of those orders and regulations.
This Part also makes a consequential amendment to the Canada Evidence Act .
Part 2 enacts the Critical Cyber Systems Protection Act to provide a framework for the protection of the critical cyber systems of services and systems that are vital to national security or public safety and that are delivered or operated as part of a work, undertaking or business that is within the legislative authority of Parliament. It also, among other things,
(a) authorizes the Governor in Council to designate any service or system as a vital service or vital system;
(b) authorizes the Governor in Council to establish classes of operators in respect of a vital service or vital system;
(c) requires designated operators to, among other things, establish and implement cyber security programs, mitigate supply-chain and third-party risks, report cyber security incidents and comply with cyber security directions;
(d) provides for the exchange of information between relevant parties; and
(e) authorizes the enforcement of the obligations under the Act and imposes consequences for non-compliance.
This Part also makes consequential amendments to certain Acts.
All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes
The hon. member may know it is not the business of the House to deal with leadership issues of the different parties. I understand what the hon. member is trying to say, but try to keep it to the legislation.
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Madam Speaker, Jean Charest was a lawyer for Huawei. The member brought up Huawei. Jean Charest is a well-known Conservative who ran in the leadership. Why would they have allowed Jean Charest to run in the leadership had that been the case?
Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
Madam Speaker, I will suggest this has direct relevance to the debate at hand. It has direct relevance because the victor of that race was not the individual the member referred to, but rather the member for Carleton, who I was proud to support and who will be so pleased to ensure we, as a majority Conservative government after a future election, have the opportunity to get things right and get this country back on track.
Caroline Desbiens Bloc Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île dOrléans—Charlevoix, QC
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.
I would like my colleague to reassure people who are watching, people in our communities who are worried about a device that is in their hands for much of the day. These people live with this device in their home. They use this device to share anecdotes, conversations and occasionally intimate secrets, believing that it all belongs exclusively to them.
Since our colleague does not seem interested in better control of cyber-attacks, how does he expect to reassure the public without moving toward tighter cybersecurity?
Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
Madam Speaker, I cannot hold up my cellphone, but what is absolutely key to the whole conversation we are having is the fact that all of us in this place carry an incredibly powerful computing device that only a few years ago would have been something we would not have seen even in the most futuristic sci-fi novels and movies. The space in which we are discussing cybersecurity has evolved so rapidly.
Specifically to the question the member asked regarding privacy, it is a very important one. It is one that, as a member of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, we need to make sure the legislation we have in this country, including privacy legislation both on the application of government and the privacy of all Canadians in terms of corporations and that whole space, reflects the modern realities. In many cases, decades old legislation needs to be updated to reflect the realities of today.
Bonita Zarrillo NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Madam Speaker, when we talk about the updated realities of today, persons with disabilities rely heavily on these technologies and this access. If I think about persons with disabilities who rely on technologies for everyday barrier reduction interactions in their lives, how can their rights to access be protected?
Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
Madam Speaker, the right to access is absolutely key. We have seen some incredible technological advancements that have helped those who face disabilities in a wide variety of things. Outside of the context of what Bill C-26 directly addresses in terms of cybersecurity, there is a particular connection, because if we do not have things like secure networks, if we do not ensure that our telecoms have consistent and stable networks that we can trust as a country, then access becomes a real issue. Malicious foreign-state actors could take advantage of that, which would disadvantage all Canadians, but specifically those who depend on technology to mitigate things like disabilities.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes
Order. It is my duty, pursuant to Standing Order 38, to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Bow River, Taxation; the hon. member for South Okanagan—West Kootenay, Post-Secondary Education.
Sherry Romanado Liberal Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the fantastic member for Lac-Saint-Louis.
It is with great pleasure that I rise to discuss Bill C-26, an act respecting cybersecurity. I will address elements in the legislation that deal with securing Canada's telecommunications system.
As Canadians rely more and more on digital communications, it is critical that our telecommunications system be secure. Let me assure this House and in listening to the debate today I think we all agree that the issue of cybersecurity is of utmost importance. The Government of Canada takes the security of this system seriously, which is why we conducted a review of 5G technology and the associated security and economic considerations.
It is clear that 5G technology holds lots of promise for Canadians for advanced telemedicine, connected and autonomous vehicles, smart cities, cleaner energy, precision agriculture, smart mining, and a lot more. Our security review also made clear that 5G technology will introduce new security concerns that malicious actors could exploit. Hostile actors have long sought and will continue to seek to exploit vulnerabilities in our telecommunications system.
CSIS, the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service, acknowledged this in its most recent publicly available annual report. The report states:
Canada remains a target for malicious cyber-enabled espionage, sabotage, foreign influence, and terrorism related activities, which pose significant threats to Canada's national security, its interests and its economic stability.
The report states that “[c]yber actors conduct malicious activities to advance their political, economic, military, security, and ideological interests. They seek to compromise government and private sector computer systems by manipulating their users or exploiting security vulnerabilities”.
The CSIS report also highlighted the increasing cyber-threat that ransomware poses. The Communications Security Establishment has similarly raised concerns about threats like ransomware in recent public threat assessments. We have seen how such attacks by criminal actors threaten to publish a victim's data or block access to it unless a ransom is paid. However, it is not just cybercriminals doing this. CSIS warned that state actors are increasingly using these tactics, often through proxies, to advance their objectives and evade attribution.
To be sure, Canadians, industry and government have, to this point, worked hard to defend our telecom system, but we must always be on the alert, always guarding against the next attacks. This has become more important as people now are often working remotely from home office environments.
5G technology is adding to these challenges. In 5G systems, sensitive functions will become increasingly decentralized in order to boost speeds when required.
Cell towers are a familiar sight in our communities and along our highways. The 5G networks will add many smaller access points to increase speeds. As well, the number of devices that the 5G network will connect will also grow exponentially.
Given the greater interconnectedness and interdependence of 5G networks, a breach in this environment could have a more significant impact on the safety of Canadians than with older technology. Bad actors could have more of an impact on our critical infrastructure than before.
The security review we conducted found that in order for Canada to reap the benefits of 5G, the government needs to be properly equipped to promote the security of the telecommunications system. We need to be able to adapt to the changing technological and threat environment. For these reasons, we are proposing amendments to the Telecommunications Act. The amendments will ensure that the security of our telecommunications system remains an overriding objective.
This bill will expand the list of objectives set out in section 7 of the Telecommunications Act. It will add the words “to promote the security of the Canadian telecommunications system”.
It is important for those words to be in the act.
It means government will be able to exercise its powers under the legislation for the purposes of securing Canada's telecommunications system.
The amendments also include authorities to prohibit Canadian telecommunications service providers from using products and services from high-risk suppliers in 5G and 4G networks if deemed necessary and after consultation with telecommunications service providers and other stakeholders.
It would also give the government the authority to require telecommunications service providers to take any other actions to promote the security of the telecom networks upon which all critical infrastructure sectors depend.
We have listened to our security experts; we have listened to Canadians; we have listened to our allies and we are following the right path. We will ensure that our networks and our economy are kept secure. A safe and secure cyberspace is important for Canada's competitiveness, economic stability and long-term prosperity.
It is clear that the telecommunications infrastructure has become increasingly essential. It must be secure and it must be resilient. Telecommunications presents an economic opportunity, one that grows our economy and creates jobs. The amendments to the Telecommunications Act accompany the proposed critical cyber systems protection act. This bill will improve the ability of designated organizations to prepare, prevent, respond to and recover from all types of cyber-incidents, including ransomware. It will designate telecommunications as a vital service. Together, this legislative package will strengthen our ability to defend the telecommunications and other critical sectors, such as finance, energy and transportation, that Canadians rely on every single day.
The legislation before us today fits within the Government of Canada's telecommunications reliability agenda. Under this agenda we intend to promote robust networks and systems, strengthen accountability and coordinate planning and preparedness.
Canadians depend on telecommunications services in all aspects of their lives, and the security and reliability of our networks has never been more crucial. These services are fundamental to the safety, prosperity and well-being of Canadians.
We will work tirelessly to keep Canadians safe and able to communicate securely. This legislation is an important tool to enable us to do that. I look forward to working with members in this House to getting this right and making sure that our telecommunications system is as strong as it can be.
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
Madam Speaker, in earnest, the government has had significant failures when it comes to procurement. I would point to shipbuilding, where we are years behind. It has also had significant failures with respect to IT. I point to the Phoenix pay system.
Given these failures, what has the government learned, and how can the Canadian public believe the government will be able to deliver on this legislation?
Sherry Romanado Liberal Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC
Madam Speaker, I had the opportunity to sit on the defence committee during my first mandate, and I had the opportunity to work closely with the then minister of national defence on “Strong, Secure, Engaged”. We are going to be reviewing “Strong, Secure, Engaged” in terms of our defence spending, including what we are going to be doing on procurement.
A lot of things have changed in the last seven years in terms of defence, like what is happening across the way in terms of Ukraine and Russia, cyber and how significantly things have changed. We absolutely need to invest in cyber and make sure we get our defence procurement projects completed.
Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech.
There are people from the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada on the Hill today. They met with the Minister of Official Languages. The House is working on Bill C-13 because we know that the French language is declining in Quebec and Canada, so efforts to promote French must be made.
My colleague represents a riding in which 80% of the population speaks French as their mother tongue. She just delivered a speech that was about 80% in English. Does that not make her a bit uncomfortable? Does she not think that a clearer message could be sent here in the House?
Her government could also send a clearer message by giving speeches more openly in French.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes
The hon. member's question is a little off topic.
I will nevertheless give the hon. member for Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne a chance to respond.
Sherry Romanado Liberal Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC
Madam Speaker, if the member wants to ask a question about the subject matter of the bill we are debating, I would be pleased to answer.
With respect to language, I speak both official languages and am very proud to do so.
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Madam Speaker, the question of Canada's ability to deal with our situation in an increasingly unstable world raises serious questions about priorities. For example, we are years behind on the frigates that are supposed to be brought forward by the navy. The cost overruns are staggering, yet we have just seen in Ukraine that the Russian flagship, Admiral Makarov, was taken out by drones.
Do we need to completely reassess our thinking? This is the 21st century. We are investing, often, in 20th-century solutions in a world of warfare, cyberterrorism and cyber-power that is completely transforming the nature of warfare and democracy's ability to defend itself.
Does my colleague think we need to do a larger rethink across the board in terms of our strategies and our ability to defend ourselves?