SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 181 - Apr/20/23

Apr/20/23 3:45:17 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-27

Madam Speaker, I had the opportunity to speak in a large debate, actually with Noam Chomsky, if one can believe it, with the Montreal institute for artificial intelligence, on a similar topic. The reality is that, with AI, the toothpaste is out of the tube. We are not putting it back in. It is incumbent upon humanity to answer that question with a positive outcome that we are putting guardrails around AI so it is developed in the best interest of humanity and propels humanity forward. We need a governance system that allows us to do this. I am not speaking maliciously against AIDA. It was written at a time well before the technological advances that happened, and it is not going to meet the needs of what my colleague opposite is describing. I would encourage him to go back to his caucus to say that we need to take this component of the bill out. The government needs to rethink it and Parliament needs to think in a non-partisan way about how we are going to drive to that outcome, with smart governance.

185 words

Context: House Hansard - 181 - Apr/20/23

Mr. René Villemure (Trois-Rivières, BQ)

Apr/20/23 4:15:11 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-27

Madam Speaker, the section of the legislation on artificial intelligence, or AI, suggests self‑regulation. I would like to know whether my colleague supports self‑regulation or if, on the contrary, the state should further regulate the use of AI.

42 words

Context: House Hansard - 181 - Apr/20/23

M. Joël Lightbound

Apr/20/23 4:46:31 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-27

Madam Speaker, I am following the debate. If we look at Europe, it seems quite complicated to create a framework to govern artificial intelligence. However, I think we should draw inspiration from Europe's efforts. The Standing Committee on Industry and Technology is certainly going to want more information about how the Europeans are going about it. One thing is certain. I think what makes this so difficult is that the technology is evolving so fast. The part of Bill C-27 that deals with AI, as currently proposed, gives the government the freedom to do a lot through regulation, which is not necessarily ideal as far as I am concerned. However, when it comes to AI, I doubt that there is any other option. Today we are talking about ChatGPT, but I can almost guarantee that by next year, if not this summer, we will have moved on to something completely different. The situation is changing so fast that I think we need to be very nimble in dealing with AI. I have heard the Conservative member for Calgary Nose Hill, whom I see eye to eye with on these issues, use the word nimble. What I like about Bill C‑27 is that it creates the position of a commissioner who reports to the minister and who will look into these issues. I have long believed that we should have someone to oversee AI, someone to study all the new capabilities and the risks of accidents that this poses—because there are serious risks—and to be able to translate this into terms that the general public, legislators and the House can understand.

280 words