Industry committee  Thank you very much for the question. Ms. Denham talked about the European approach as being a first mover. In fact, there's starting to be a wisdom that, while they're a first mover, they're no longer the right approach. The concern is very much that not only is it not the right structure, but that it will impede innovation.

Industry committee  Thank you very much, Mr. Perkins. I think that one of the real failings of AIDA is that there are no guiding principles. The guiding principles are important, because they will influence the regulation and, where there's enforcement, what those principles should be. I indicated in a previous answer that some of the guiding principles that could be a useful start were in that U.K. private member's bill.

Industry committee  Mr. Chair, could I add just a very quick supplemental to that? Mr. Masse, the question you ask is very important, but we need to recognize that one of the reasons there is the discrimination in algorithms is that they're being trained on data that is currently being used in other contexts.

Industry committee  Mr. Vis, thank you for the question. I'm not familiar with that, and I don't know that it provides any insight into whether this bill would be adequate because there isn't proper management of IT. However, to the extent that there's a requirement for expertise related to the regulation of AI, that expertise doesn't currently exist, in my view, within ISED.

Industry committee  Mr. Lemire, thank you very much for that very important question. The draft law that's in front of you doesn't deal with intellectual property rights at all, and that's unlike the EU legislation, which has at least a provision requiring transparency in data that's disclosed. It's also unlike the draft U.K. bill that requires compliance with copyright laws, and it is also not consistent with draft French legislation, which would also require compliance with copyright laws for training models.

Industry committee  If you look at proposed subsection 93(2) of the CPPA, the commissioner has very broad powers to order compliance with the act, including “take measures to comply with this Act”, “stop doing something that is in contravention of this Act”, and so forth. If there is an entity that is in contravention, the commissioner has the right to effectively get an injunction and have that injunction enforced by the court.

Industry committee  Thank you very much for those questions. When I looked at the minister's letter, which provides some guidance, what I was very pleased to see are the new areas that are proposed to be regulated. We don't know how they're going to be regulated, but there was a proposal to add in dealing with discrimination in the courts and administrative tribunals, and I think that's very important.

Industry committee  Mr. Masse, I don't envy the predicament you're in. In fact, the predicament you're in is a microcosm of the whole public who's interested in the regulation of artificial intelligence. It was quite clear from the minister's statement that there were amendments. We haven't seen the amendments on AIDA.

Industry committee  Thank you for your question. I think that is a fantastic question. The private member's bill that you referred to is also an attempt to have an agile mechanism for the regulation of AI. There are two things about that bill that I think are fundamentally important. If this committee is going to make recommendations for improvements, two things can be taken from that bill, which I would strongly recommend.

Industry committee  The structure of the adjudication of issues, where they start and how they get appealed, is a very important question. We have to recognize that, with the importance of privacy and the amount at stake for the public and organizations, getting it right is really important. The powers of the Privacy Commissioner are very broad.

Industry committee  Mr. Chair, while we're waiting, can I respond to the question from Mr. Williams on legitimate interest?

Industry committee  Thank you very much for that question. I have concerns about legitimate interest as well. As to whether it is weaker or stronger than the GDPR, it is substantially weaker than the GDPR in its wording. The GDPR, like the CPPA proposal, has a balancing.... It has no “get out of jail free” card.

Industry committee  Thank you very much for the question. It's a very good one. One of the concerns I have about the CPPA, in particular, is that it creates these ambiguous new standards and requirements with open-ended tests, such as what would be appropriate or what a reasonable person would think.

Industry committee  Thank you for that follow-up question. I have reviewed the amendments proposed by the minister, which make it clear that the joint purposes of the act are the protection of the fundamental right of privacy and the legitimate interests of business. I think that's an appropriate way to do it.

Industry committee  Thank you very much for the opportunity to appear. I am senior counsel at McCarthy Tétrault, with a practice focused on technology, intellectual property and privacy. I'm the author of several books in the field, including an eight-volume treatise on computer, Internet and electronic commerce law.