Information & Ethics Committee on May 7th, 2026

[Fares Al Soud, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Dufresne and Mr. Chénier, for being with us today.

I come at topics like these quite distinctly, because I've seen the challenges regarding data privacy and data collection developing over my entire life, quite literally.

I've also lived through all that is artificial intelligence differently from many on this committee. I've seen its progression in an academic context, in the workplace environment and, certainly, socially. It's clear that its usage is growing rapidly across the world.

There are expectations that government will make use of it to better Canadians' lives through increased efficiencies. At the same time, it's important that we make sure it's used in a safe and responsible way in the public service.

As you know well, Commissioner, our government launched the first public AI register, which provides information about the use of artificial intelligence across federal institutions. It goes without saying—but I will anyway—that it is a significant step toward transparency and responsible AI governance.

Treasury Board is now looking to elevate the directive on automated decision-making into law through the Privacy Act. Could you speak to the importance of this directive being embedded into law? What does this increased level of transparency mean for Canadians?

[Philippe Dufresne]

This parallels a recommendation I have been making, and it has been reflected in the government's consultation. There have been many exchanges between my office and Treasury Board, and I spoke to the minister. Those recommendations are largely reflected in the consultation.

I've advocated that privacy impact assessments be a legal requirement because, currently, it's a requirement in the Treasury Board policy and directive. It's the same as the algorithmic impact assessment you're referring to. That's good, but it's not enough.

When something is required by policy, we see more instances of it not being complied with because the consequence is less than if you were to break the law. Raising this to the level of a legal obligation makes it more transparent. It's more visible when it's in the law. It focuses and gives it a higher priority, so I support both the privacy impact and the algorithmic impact assessments being legal requirements.

[Fares Al Soud, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

This is a follow-up. I'm sure you know that we're looking to strengthen privacy notice requirements, including when automated decision systems are used. Could you speak to the importance of this? What does it mean for Canadians to have something like this easily accessible to them?

[Philippe Dufresne]

It's important for Canadians to have a better understanding of artificial intelligence, decision-making and how it impacts them. This is an area where I agree with the consultation. We need to have explanations for why the decision was made and what type of information was used to make the decision. That not only protects Canadians by telling them what's going on but also generates trust.

It's important now. I made this recommendation in the private sector two or three years ago. I thought it was very important in the early days of AI. In a way, there's still a lot of development, and it's moving very quickly. Having more information, the ability to ask questions—not to get the technical details, but to know the types of information and decisions—and transparency are important.

[Fares Al Soud, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

Canadians are more sensitive, now more than ever, to this notion of trust, specifically in relation to how their data is used. I'd like to get your thoughts on theme one, this notion of “Enabling integrated services”.

At times, I think Canadians view government as “one organization”. That is, of course, not the case. It is several institutions, at times operating in silos, admittedly. I think we'd all agree that there is significant importance in ensuring that services are connected and easy to navigate.

I'm still relatively new to this committee, but I understand that, under the current Privacy Act, it can be difficult for federal institutions to share personal data seamlessly. I also understand that this leads to delays, duplications and, at times, frustrations.

As the government looks to modernize its operations, could you speak to the importance of ensuring there are integrated services while also ensuring that privacy protections remain fundamental?

[Philippe Dufresne]

It is important to have both. Government needs to be more nimble. There's a lot of importance to that. Canadians expect that, but we have to make sure we're doing it with the appropriate safeguards.

If data is going to be shared.... Perhaps there's not enough ability to share data now. If there is too much ability to share it, without enough safeguards, then there is a risk. For example, if I give my information to one department, say, for a health reason, then there wouldn't necessarily be a need for this to be used in a completely unrelated department without my knowledge or awareness.

Those guardrails are important. That's going to generate trust. Canadians are going to be happy that they don't have to send nine or 10 different forms to different places. They also don't want situations where there's a privacy breach or where public servants—many people in other departments that have nothing to do with their files—now have access to their information. It needs to be very well built and have those other measures to protect privacy. The order-making power and strengthening the privacy regime are opportunities to show that they go hand in hand. That's how you generate trust.

In the government's pillars for AI, the first pillar, “Protecting Canadians and Safeguarding our Democracy”, talks about trust. That's how you're going to encourage AI. In order to do that, you need modernized laws.

[Fares Al Soud, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

I rushed over for this conversation, but I suspect I'm out of time.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Linda Lapointe]

Thank you. You have indeed slightly gone over your allowed speaking time.

Dear witnesses, thank you for joining us. This was all very informative. We're very grateful to you.

We'll now proceed to the main estimates 2026-27. I'd therefore like to thank the witnesses. We will now continue with our work.

Unanimous consent is required when all votes are taken together.

Do I have unanimous consent?

[A voice]

Yes, absolutely.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Linda Lapointe]

Ms. Gaudreau, do you agree?

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Yes.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Linda Lapointe]

Gentlemen, do you also agree?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

I would ask that it be carried on division.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Linda Lapointe]

Yes, wait one second.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

“On division” is a new term for me.

OFFICE OF THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND ETHICS COMMISSIONER Vote 1—Program expenditures.......... $8,284,644

(Vote 1 agreed to on division)

OFFICE OF THE SENATE ETHICS OFFICER Vote 1—Program expenditures.......... $1,507,801

(Vote 1 agreed to on division)

OFFICES OF THE COMMISSIONER OF LOBBYING Vote 1—Program expenditures.......... $5,463,805

(Vote 1 agreed to on division)

OFFICES OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONERS OF CANADA Vote 1—Program expenditures - Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada.......... $15,737,098 Vote 5—Program expenditures - Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada.......... $33,232,604

(Votes 1 and 5 agreed to on division)

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Linda Lapointe]

Shall the chair report these votes, less the amounts voted in interim supply, to the House?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Linda Lapointe]

Is it the will of the committee to adjourn the meeting?

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Okay.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Linda Lapointe]

Have a good two weeks. Come back in shape. Have fun.

This meeting is adjourned.