I tend to agree with you. It's not going to be just one framework. It's an overarching governance framework or strategy. An approach to what it means for Canada to properly govern high-impact AI systems in our jurisdiction is important.
I'll remind the committee that we already have laws in place governing certain aspects of artificial intelligence. Depending on the sector, we might actually have more guidance available to those operating.... For example, OSFI guidance has come out. They updated the model risk-management approach for financial services recently, in partnership with the Global Risk Institute and a series of financial operators. They have the Agile framework and the EDGE principles—again, so financial services have a governance framework for the use of AI in various contexts.
We can leverage what sectors are doing in order to inform what the centre ought to do, and to fill gaps. That is an important approach I raised in the ETHI committee last year—looking at different jurisdictions and how they have been modelling, or attempting to put together, an overarching framework. That framework doesn't have to be perfect. It has to create a narrative around what AI governance looks like and what we're drawing from, in terms of sectoral and existing provincial-territorial laws. Then fill in gaps to provide that clarity.