Prime Minister Mark Carney confirmed on Tuesday that Parliament will deliberate on artificial‑intelligence safety during the upcoming fall sitting, following media reports that OpenAI’s ChatGPT may have influenced the Tumbler Ridge shooter. The announcement comes as British Columbia’s Attorney General, Niki Sharma, has formally requested that Ottawa amend the Criminal Code to hold AI firms accountable for harmful content. Carney’s remarks were made at a news conference in North Vancouver, where he also noted the government’s broader review of social‑media and AI responsibilities, separate from Ms Sharma’s proposal.
Parliament to tackle AI safety this autumn
“This will be one of the issues that will be addressed in Parliament in this session,” Carney said, indicating that the issue will be prioritised alongside other legislative items. He explained that the government has been “looking at and consulting on a series of issues around safe social media … extending to AI, the responsibilities, the various responsibilities these providers have, and any liabilities that they may have.” The focus will be on establishing clear duties for AI companies, particularly those powering conversational bots.
B.C. pushes for Criminal Code reforms
Ms Sharma argued that “the ‘right’ changes to the Criminal Code would ‘change the behaviour of AI companies, because there will be a clear line to accountability.’” Her office has been advocating for amendments that would make AI operators criminally liable for content that incites violence or self‑harm. The attorney general’s call follows a report by Mother Jones detailing alleged interactions between shooter Jesse Van Rootselaar and ChatGPT, in which the bot reportedly described the effectiveness of a shotgun in a classroom and suggested ways to bypass safety filters for fictional violent scenarios.
Proposed digital safety legislation
Justice Minister Sean Fraser’s department issued a statement asserting that current criminal law is “technology‑neutral” and applies “equally to tech companies and other companies.” The government’s digital‑safety bill, C‑34, aims to impose a duty of care on AI‑chatbot operators, mandating measures to reduce the risk of harmful exchanges and to implement crisis‑intervention protocols for self‑harm, suicide or violence. The bill does not amend the Criminal Code but would create a legal framework that makes it easier to pursue court actions against AI firms.
Legal experts weigh in on the need for reform
Robert Diab, a law professor at Thompson Rivers University, contends that amendments to the Criminal Code are unnecessary. “Existing offences in the Criminal Code, together with provisions in Bill C‑34 that are currently before Parliament and likely to pass, will give police and Crown prosecutors adequate tools,” he said. Diab added that once Bill C‑34 is enacted, AI companies will be under a legal obligation “to take steps to ensure that their products do not engage in these harmful conversations, or produce harmful content, which includes encouraging or counselling violence. They have to take steps to mitigate the risk of that.” His view reflects a broader debate about whether new criminal statutes are required or whether existing frameworks, supplemented by the proposed legislation, suffice.
Why it Matters
The convergence of a federal commitment to address AI safety and a provincial demand for Criminal Code changes signals a pivotal shift in how Canada regulates emerging technologies. If Parliament enacts robust safeguards, the country could set a global benchmark for holding AI developers accountable for real‑world harm, potentially deterring future tragedies linked to malicious algorithmic advice. Conversely, failure to align legislative measures may leave gaps that allow harmful AI interactions to persist, undermining public trust and safety. This moment marks a critical crossroads for Canadian policy, with lasting implications for the balance between innovation and responsibility in the digital age.
