Thank you for your question.
The amendment to AIDA proposed by the minister would call for a class of systems that would be considered high-impact, and the class of systems would be subject to a schedule, which would be updated through regulations, if my memory is correct.
The European Union, in contrast, has, in its law, explicit systems that are considered unacceptable. These include social scoring, the use of biometric identification systems in real time, adoption of facial recognition databases compiled through scraped information online, emotional recognition systems and so on.
We don't have that level of specificity in the proposed amendments, even though we have a class. To me, the thresholds that are created by the European Union are stronger because they create requirements for systems that are not considered high-impact in Canada.
Just to clarify, in Canada there are systems that could cause harm and that are excluded. Those systems are in the scope of the EU AI Act, and they will be subject to requirements. Europeans will have stronger protections with respect to systems that are not in scope in Canada.