Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to thank all the witnesses. Their comments are really very interesting.
Mr. Guilmain, I'll turn to you.
I'll go back to the example you gave, the convenience store in La Tuque. We all understand that you chose that location, since the convenience store is in Minister François-Philippe Champagne's riding. Up until now, he probably thought he had a little private life, but with the convenience store story, his life has now become public.
I'm using your example to talk about small businesses across Canada. We know that 95% of businesses in Canada are the backbone of our economy. With this bill, we are addressing both individuals and businesses and entrepreneurs who will have to adapt to this legislation.
Earlier, you referred to a survey you conducted on Quebec's Bill 25. Nearly 70% of respondents needed more information or clarification on the act.
Do you think the process will possibly be the same for Bill C‑27?
We're talking about consultations. You think this is a good bill, from what I understand. However, I must say that this isn't exactly what we've heard since the beginning of the consultations.
A number of people have told us that they weren't consulted. Representatives of organizations, who have appeared before our committee so far, have said that they weren't consulted. Some have told us that it would be preferable for them to be consulted. I think one of the witnesses said so earlier. He said that it would be good if there were more consultations.
Do you think it would be a good idea to hold more consultations?
We've been told on a number of occasions that we should normally, at the outset, separate the whole issue of artificial intelligence from that of privacy, because they are two completely different things.
What are the real or possible consequences of the elements that will, in a way, bury SMEs in bureaucracy?