Industry Committee on Oct. 31st, 2023

[Siobhán Vipond]

Absolutely, there needs to be an ability for folks to work through it and make a complaint, but we have to make sure that, when that happens, the right people are listening to it so there's an ability to respond in a reasonable way.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you.

Ms. Vipond, has the CLC considered specific changes to this bill that would help to include labour laws or provisions to ensure that the concerns you've raised are addressed? Could you elaborate a little bit on those? Are there other countries or jurisdictions that have done so that you would be considering when you include these?

[Siobhán Vipond]

I will say that one of our recommendations is that AIDA should be reconceived, and that's from a human, labour and privacy rights-based perspective so that we can place transparency, accountability and consultation at the core of the approach to AI, which is not what we see in front of us, so that is a big ask.

We are looking to that executive order in the United States as having better language than we're seeing. We also see examples in other jurisdictions where it's being approached from a social dialogue sense. We do have many asks about this, but I think, fundamentally, that is a big one.

I need to reiterate that we have to expand who's covered and that the government and Crown corporations cannot be excluded. That comes from a workers' rights perspective.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you.

I have a last question for you. What recourse mechanisms still missing in the bill with regard to algorithms or data collection, use and permissions that could impact the relations between employers and employees would you like to see included in this bill?

[Siobhán Vipond]

We hear lots of workers telling us about how AI is being used in terms of surveillance in the workplace, and as a human rights issue, when the process excludes a person. There's actually no human intervention in that process, which is a huge concern for us. That is one of the big things we're looking at when we're talking about what needs to be addressed here.

The mechanisms that are currently laid out in AIDA don't give us enough opportunity to talk about that and regulate it, because unregulated goes unchecked, and then we're going to fall into a position where human rights, including workers' rights, are not going to be respected.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you very much.

That's all for me, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you very much, Ms. McPherson.

We're almost done, but Mr. Perkins has one last question. I trust it will be short, Mr. Perkins.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

That's a challenge for me.

I'd love to ask the Canadian Bankers Association something, but maybe I'll leave that until after.

Mr. Balsillie, who owns somebody's data? Is it the individual or the company?

[Jim Balsillie]

You can't really own data; it's about control of the data. The question of who's allowed to collect it in the first place...that's lawlessness. We're living in a lawless world right now, so people are just doing it without any real laws that say what you're allowed to do in the first place.

It's colonizing personal space. That's what's happening in lawlessness right now.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

To the Canadian Bankers Association, you mentioned proposed section 35 earlier, which I did as well. The current Privacy Act limits that power to use it without knowledge for research and statistics to academic-type things. This complete replacement leaves it wide open because it just says “an organization”; it doesn't limit it to scholastic or academic organizations.

Could you comment on that?

[Lorraine Krugel]

Actually, we did not provide any recommendations relating to that one.

What is the concern about that one?

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Proposed section 35 says, “An organization may disclose an individual’s personal information without their knowledge or consent” if it's used “for statistical purposes or for study or research purposes”, which is pretty wide open. Previously, PIPEDA limited it to scholarly work. That leaves it open to anybody—any organization—to do it without consent, in my view.

[Lorraine Krugel]

I'm not sure that that would be a provision that our members would be looking to leverage for the internal research and analysis that they do.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

I can tell you that, as a former bank marketer, I would exploit that very well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

We'll leave it at that, Mr. Perkins.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

With your permission, I'd like to thank the witnesses who are here today. We have heard from high-quality witnesses since we began our study. I'm raising a point of order because I would like us to have more time with them. To do so, if possible, we would have to hear from fewer witnesses at our next few meetings.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

That's understood, Mr. Généreux.

We have heard from six panels of witnesses, which is remarkable. We normally have five. We've invited more in order to be sure of having diversified witness panels, as was the case today.

I want to thank the witnesses for their time; we are grateful to them for that. Thank you for enlightening us.

With that, I want to thank the interpreters, our support staff, analysts and the clerk.

The meeting is adjourned.