We're back to the question that I answered a few minutes ago.
Principles-based, technology-neutral legislation for the private sector makes sense as a starting point. The reason we're recommending that there be specific legislation for police forces has to do with the harms of that particular technology of facial recognition. It may well be that certain uses of the technology by private companies raise extremely high risks, not only to privacy but to other rights. Clearview is a good example. We call that mass surveillance.
Mr. Fergus referred to other circumstances. I agree that to denote emotions in order to sell a product, or for whatever other purpose, should not be allowed.
We will provide a few examples of good pieces of legislation. There's draft legislation in the European Union, not yet adopted, which is a good model. Obviously, it would have to be adapted. It says, among other things, that facial recognition should not be used to violate human rights That applies horizontally, whether to the state or to private companies. That is something that I think Canadian parliamentarians should seriously consider.