Industry Committee on Feb. 7th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you very much.

I now have to put an end to this round of questions.

I give the floor to Ms. Lapointe for five minutes.

[Viviane LaPointe, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

My first question is for Ms. Curran.

The media reported on a recent decision by Meta to allow a manipulated video of the President of the United States to remain on your platform. I note that Meta's oversight board stated that the loophole threatens elections worldwide and should be closed as soon as possible. That's a pretty big and serious statement. I think all Canadians want and expect Meta to adhere to the AIDA legislation once implemented.

Can you tell the committee today what your organization currently does to protect against altered video content, and what would be done differently if the AIDA were applied?

[Rachel Curran]

We do have clear policies against manipulated media, whether it's video or audio, if it's misleading, and we remove that kind of content.

We set up the oversight board a number of years ago to give us guidance on some of our content policies, and that's exactly what they have done in this instance. They have said that we made the wrong decision in this case, and they have given us guidance on how to apply our policies going forward. I think that's exactly what we're going to do.

We have industry-leading tools that are going to help us detect and remove AI-generated content. Certainly, for political ads and social ads, we're requiring that advertisers now disclose when they are using AI-generated content in those ads.

We just announced, for organic content, labelling requirements. We are going to label any AI-generated content as AI-generated so that users are aware, when they are seeing images on our platform, that they are generated by artificial intelligence. We're working with other industry members to make sure that we extend that to video and audio when it's technically feasible. That work is under way.

[Viviane LaPointe, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you.

My next question is for all of the witnesses, and I will ask for some brief responses.

It's clear that governments need to work with social media platforms—we have heard that very loudly today—to protect both individuals and critical infrastructure systems. Interoperability will be key to that. Will this legislation help define expectations for your organizations?

I will start with Ms. Foster.

[Nicole Foster]

I think as we engage in discussions about potential regulatory frameworks and guardrails, it always informs how we approach where we think we need to focus in responsible AI development and tooling for customers. We want to make sure that our customers are able to comply with laws as they emerge.

[Viviane LaPointe, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Ms. Curran.

[Rachel Curran]

If the question is whether the AIDA is going to help us set guardrails in Canada, the answer is maybe. It depends on where things land. If some of the amendments the minister has proposed that we're concerned about are included in the legislation, I think we would need to think about how we respond to that.

Overall, we think regulation is a good thing. We think guardrails are a good thing. By and large, the AIDA in its original form is a pretty good bill, so it's just a question of whether we can get the details right.

[Viviane LaPointe, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Go ahead, Ms. Craig or Mr. Weigelt.

[John Weigelt]

Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada has created a working group called the Canadian forum for digital infrastructure resilience. I chair the AI/ML working group, which is looking at critical infrastructure. It brings together a variety of different companies to have these conversations. We're working through and wrestling with the language in the AIDA definitions and how that applies across critical infrastructure.

We, as companies, support critical infrastructure providers, but we're not necessarily the providers ourselves, so the call to invite others in the agricultural sector, the water sector and the manufacturing sector to understand how these tools and solutions intersect is going to be critically important as we move forward.

[Viviane LaPointe, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you.

Now I'll ask our online witness.

[Jeanette Patell]

I think we're looking for more clarity. In order to answer your question, we really need to see some clarity both in the legislation itself and in how it would be applied.

[Viviane LaPointe, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you very much, Ms. Lapointe.

Mr. Garon, you have the floor.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We are coming nearly to the end of the testimony and this witness panel’s appearance.

I am trying to form an opinion on what I heard. I am just trying to see where you are at regarding regulation so that I can think about it constructively.

I must admit I am a little confused.

On the one hand, when we asked all of you if this requires regulation, the answer was yes. When we asked you if quick action is needed, the answer was yes.

On the other hand, when we got into the details, you told us that Bill C‑27 is inadequate. It contains too many things and touches on too many aspects. Then you sort of told us that a lot of legislation would need changes. I noted down which ones we discussed today: The Canada Health Act, the Canada Elections Act, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, the Criminal Code, the Copyright Act, the Patent Act and measures specifically targeting advertising for children. These types of changes would require endless legislative work, especially with the type of Parliament we’re sitting in today. In the end, it leads to us not having any regulation.

Furthermore, I think if we presented a bill to you in which we changed all of that legislation at the same time, you would probably tell us we are coming back to the same problem at the start of Bill C‑27, and it all boils down to the same thing.

If I understand correctly, it’s a matter of public relations and strategy, among other things.

I have the bad habit of being very direct. I will therefore ask you the following question: Isn’t this a rather clever way of telling us that you don’t want any regulation?

Take all the time left to answer my question.

[Nicole Foster]

I don't think we're arguing for no regulation, and we support good regulatory frameworks—all of us do. I think where there is a need for speed, there are potential opportunities for government to move more quickly with existing legislation.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

I will ask you a specific question.

Do you think that right now, Health Canada has the needed expertise to do this quickly? The department sometimes has trouble regulating medication.

Do you really think that the Chief Electoral Officer has the needed expertise to do this by the next election, which will be held in a year?

[Nicole Foster]

I think they are in a position to regulate and make decisions more quickly than it will take for this bill to pass, develop regulations and then develop the expertise to understand a Health Canada use case. I think those regulators are in a position to understand where risks lie more quickly in those specific areas, yes.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

I would like your companies to table with the committee, in writing, the list of all the individual statutes you think should be changed. That way, we have something relatively equivalent. It could be constructive. If you could do this, it would be interesting. I’d like to read it.

Mr. Chair, I do indeed ask you to please follow up on that.

[Nicole Foster]

I think some laws may not even need to be amended. The government may already have authorities that are technologically neutral. A lot of the things the committee has discussed or we hear discussed are already potentially addressed in existing law, and if you applied the law in a technologically neutral way, you may already have the powers to address those issues.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

In the interests of making a positive contribution, your respective companies could each table a list of every statute that could be changed, so that we have an equivalent.

Are you willing to do it?

[Nicole Foster]

I think what you've asked for is a significant undertaking.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, Mr. Garon.

The list must also be provided in both official languages afterwards, obviously.

Know that you can always submit documents to us. The request has been made. You are free to provide what you think is relevant through the clerk.

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

Mr. Chair, I think Ms. Craig wants to add something.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Unfortunately, we don’t have enough time, because I have to give the floor to Mr. Masse. I was a little too lax with everyone’s turns.

Mr. Masse, you have the floor.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate this.

In response to Bill C-18, Ms. Curran, Meta pulled access to news articles and sharing. One of the criticisms of that from many experts was that it was going to make children and youth more vulnerable to abuse. Your CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, at least apologized to Americans during congressional hearings a few days ago for what has taken place.

Can you explain to us—I'm trying to get at the trust factor here—what type of analysis has continued from that point? Do you disagree with the experts about that exploitation taking place through the products you have? Are we getting the same protections for our youth?

I'm surprised that there hasn't been a general, wider apology. I don't know what difference there is, other than citizenship, among those who have succumbed to this, and it has caused significant problems, including connections to suicide and self-harm. Can you assure us on the committee that an analysis is continuously going on with regard to the response to C-18 and whether or not Canadian youth are further at risk because of the spread of misinformation, which affects them mentally?