Thank you.
The minister proposed amendments at the beginning of this process more than 500 days ago—as someone said, almost two years ago—on both the privacy side and the AI side for a flawed bill. We've had a lot of witnesses on the AI side say it's a very flawed bill. Many want us to just defeat it and start all over again.
This bill started with an attempt to basically control what was called a “high-impact system”. The minister's amendments introduce two new levels of control. One is machine learning in the legislation. The other is general purposes, which, to me, seems like just about everything that would come in AI and gives the minister total regulatory power to oversee them, fine them, police them and all of that.
On the schedule, on the back of the high-impact systems, first, do you agree that now almost everything is covered with the minister's proposed amendment because they put in general-purpose AI and machine learning as well? Second, do you agree with the definition of “high-impact” that is attached in the schedule for the minister's amendment?
Mr. Bailey, please go ahead first.