Technologists for Democracy logo

Tag: ai

  • Statement from Ontario Privacy Commissioner on Waymo

    May 2026

    Technologists for Democracy reached (TfD) out to the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario (IPC), an arms-length agency that works to uphold privacy rights of everyday Ontarians in the public sector.

    We asked the IPC about the risks of allowing Waymo on our streets, and how municipal and provincial governments should ensure that privacy rights are protected. This is their response:

    The Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario (IPC) oversees compliance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA) and Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (MFIPPA). These laws establish the rules for how public institutions in Ontario such as municipalities, local, regional, or provincial governments collect, use, and disclose personal information and how they must keep this information secure. When private organizations collect personal information during commercial activities, they must comply with the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA), which is overseen by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada.

    Automated vehicles are often equipped with sensors and, depending on their configuration, can collect significant amounts of sensitive personal information.

    While our office recognizes that technological innovation can offer significant benefits to communities, these shouldn’t come at the cost of Ontarians’ privacy and access to information rights. This includes the public’s right to privacy in public spaces and to know what information is being collected about them.

    Even if public sector organizations are not directly involved in the handling of personal information collected by automated vehicles, they should establish and enforce strong access, privacy, and security controls when assessing or procuring these technologies. While public institutions can outsource services, they can’t outsource accountability for protecting personal information and privacy. Our office also recommends that provincial and municipal governments engage in meaningful public consultation before approving the use of automated vehicles in public spaces to support transparency and build public trust.The IPC has resources related to smart city technologies that may be relevant to the privacy issues associated with automated vehicles. For more information, refer to our fact sheet Smart Cities and Your Privacy Rights and our joint submission with Canada’s privacy regulators about smart city infrastructure.

  • Letter to ISED on National AI Strategy

    In response to Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada’s (ISED) 30-day national sprint on shaping Canada’s AI strategy, we submitted the following letter.

    See original PDF here.

    October 31, 2025

    Re: Help define the next chapter of Canada’s AI leadership

    National AI Strategy Consultation Needs Wider Variety of Perspectives

    Dear members of the Canada AI Strategy Task Force:

    We are Technologists for Democracy, a grassroots advocacy organization based in Toronto.

    We appreciate Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada’s vision to renew national AI strategy. However — considering the impact that such a strategy will have on various aspects of public life, democratic values, and individual rights — we maintain that public participation is not just a nice-to-have, but a democratic and practical necessity. We strongly urge that something as wide-reaching and important as a national AI strategy not be formulated in a sprint as short as a month. 

    Such a strategy requires a more thoughtful and detailed approach. Expediting the process leads to a higher risk of unforeseen public harm, wasted resources, and loss of public trust. We urge ISED to consider extending the deadline to allow for a wider variety of perspectives and responses from the public.

    We also observe that the current consultation on national AI strategy is highly biased towards an economic perspective, which puts the public at risk of exploitation by industry partners. We understand that ISED’s mandate focuses on economic development and trade; however, national AI strategy must take into consideration a variety of perspectives.

    If Canada wants to compete on the global stage for AI talent, we should lean into our strengths: diversity, inclusivity, and prudence. It is difficult to compete with the level of investment that investors in the United States offer towards AI firms located primarily in Silicon Valley. We must compete in other ways.

    Investors and entrepreneurs alike are aware of Canada’s risk-averse nature surrounding capital expenditure. This is not something to be ashamed of — Canada escaped from the worst effects of the 2008 financial crisis due in large part to caution and regulation surrounding financial institutions.

    Considerations must also be made with the possibility in mind that AI investments have created a bubble. Both in terms of a technical bubble, where technology does not function well enough to deliver the value claimed, and an economic bubble, where investors lose faith in AI companies and pull capital as investing becomes unsustainable. Mitigation strategies should evaluate the value of physical AI infrastructure, such as data centers, in case of bubble collapse.

    KPIs should not emphasize adoption of AI purely for its own sake. Canada should focus on providing resources towards education of how various forms of AI can aid business processes, with special attention towards how AI can be deployed fairly and ethically. We believe measures should focus on:

    • Adoption and implementation of strong governance frameworks which minimize potential harm of AI systems, and ensure fair and transparent outcomes.
    • Employment creation by AI, rather than workforce reduction.
    • Creation of mechanisms for continuous feedback to guide improvements and provide targeted training opportunities.

    AI should not be forced onto society only for the economic benefits that it may bring. AI should serve and augment society, elevating those who would otherwise be invisible, and contributing to a fairer and more inclusive Canada. It is important to keep humans in the loop in such a way that we humans get the most out of machines, as opposed to machines making the most out of humans.

    We reiterate that national AI strategy must:

    • Be made in consultation with a wider variety of perspectives.
    • Not be exclusively focused on the economic implications of AI.
    • Take into consideration the possibility of an AI bubble bursting.
    • Focus on fair, ethical and transparent AI governance frameworks.

    Now is the pivotal time to build an AI strategy that serves all Canadians.

    We must build it right.

    Sincerely,

    Khasir Hean
    [email redacted for privacy]

    Gurpreet Kaur
    [email redacted for privacy]

    Jim Rootham
    [email redacted for privacy]

    Jenny Zhang
    [email redacted for privacy]

    Adam Motaouakkil
    [email redacted for privacy]

    Technologists for Democracy
    techfordemocracy.ca