Madam Speaker, I hope to be able to work closely with the member in this Parliament on any number of issues. He mentioned the good work of our colleague from Prince George. I would add the member for Timmins—James Bay and the member for Thornhill and, of course, many members from this side of the House as well.
The three of us, representing three different parties, were able to attend in London. As I mentioned in my remarks, one would be hard pressed to know which party we each represented. We were there on behalf of Canada working with our international partners from different parties as well. Similarly, when looking at the U.K. Parliament, one would be hard pressed to know who the Tory or Labour members were. That fundamentally is the approach that bears results.
Tackling tech and talking about GDPR-like rules became a growing consensus at our committee, cross-partisan. We also looked at algorithmic transparency, the ability to audit algorithms to understand what are the positive and negative impacts of these algorithms that are being employed that are affecting our lives and affecting society.
In fact, in the public sector if a department or agency wants to employ an algorithm that is going to have a potential adverse effect, some 80-odd questions have to be answered. They are in the four risk categories. Depending on the risk category, they take certain remedial efforts. A private sector company that has many more data points and is doing many more things has no obligation whatsoever. That obviously needs to change.