Latest news with #CanadaStrong
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
What are Canada's governing Liberals going to do about AI?
Fresh off his election victory, Prime Minister Mark Carney has been focused on standing up to Donald Trump's claims on Canada as the 51st state and American tariffs. But while that political drama unfolds, one topic that seems to have quietly slipped under the radar is the rise of artificial intelligence. Despite its transformative impact on everything from jobs to national security, AI received surprisingly little attention during the campaign and in the first weeks following Carney's victory. The consequences of that lack of attention are already starting to show, as emissions and electricity costs continue unabated without a clear vision of where AI fits in. Read more: Although Carney has appointed former journalist Evan Solomon as Canada's first-ever AI minister, it's not yet clear what action the Liberal government plans to take on AI. The Liberals' 'Canada Strong' plan outlining the prime minister's proposals is scarce on details. Still, it provides some clues on how the Liberals see AI and what they believe it offers to the Canadian economy — and also what they seem to have misunderstood. First, the plan includes some robust initiatives for improving Canada's digital infrastructure, which lags behind other leading countries, especially in terms of rural broadband and reliable cell service. To accomplish these goals, the Liberals say they'll incentivize investment by 'introducing flow-through shares to our Canadian startup ecosystem…to raise money faster' for AI and other technologies. In other words, they will reuse the model of mining and oil companies whereby investors can claim a tax deduction for the same amount as their investment. A major question is whether Canada's investment ecosystem has enough big players willing to take these risks. The plan gets less promising as it comes to the implementation of AI within 'the economy of tomorrow.' The Liberals say they plan to build more data centres, improve computing capacity and create digital supply chain solutions 'to improve efficiency and reduce costs for Canadians.' All that that sounds OK — so far. But how will they do this? The Liberals plan to establish the Bureau of Research, Engineering and Advanced Leadership in Science (BOREALIS), linking AI development directly to the Canadian Armed Forces and the Communications Security Establishment Canada, which provides the federal government with information technology security and foreign signals intelligence. This approach to AI is focused on what it offers to Canada's defence, whether by manufacturing semiconductors or improving intelligence gathering, so that it can rely less on the U.S. Similarly, Canadian defence tech firms will access funding to help reduce dependence on American suppliers and networks. The Liberals are pledging sovereignty and autonomy for Canada's defence and security, all enabled by 'the construction and development of AI infrastructure.' What goes unsaid is the intense power needs of data centres, and the consequences for emissions and climate action of 'building the next generation of data centres' in Canada. New data centres cannot be built without also constructing more renewable energy infrastructure, and none of this addresses emissions or climate change. If the centres crop up in big numbers as planned, Canadians could also see their electricity costs go up or become less reliable. That's because finding space within the existing grid is not as easy as it may sound when AI data centres require over 100 megawatts (MW) of electricity demand versus five to 10 MW for a regular centre. With the rapidly evolving market for AI-based data centres, Canadian policymakers need to provide clear guidance to utilities in terms of their current decisions on competing industrial-scale demands. As the Canadian Climate Institute points out: 'Anything less risks higher rates, increased emissions, missed economic opportunities — or all of the above.' So far, the Liberal plan fails to address any of these concerns. What else does the 'economy of tomorrow' hold? Apparently, it means more efficient government. According to the Liberal plan, AI 'is how government improves service delivery, it is how government keeps up with the speed of business, and it is how government maximizes efficiency and reduces cost.' Despite otherwise clashing with the Trump administration, this language is reminiscent of Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which has also centred its use of AI. Read more: The Liberals will open an Office of Digital Transformation, which aims to get rid of red tape and 'reduce barriers for businesses to operate in Canada.' They don't seem to really know what this would actually look like, however. They say: 'This could mean using AI to address government service backlogs and improve service delivery times, so that Canadians get better services, faster.' Their fiscal plan points out that this frame of thinking applies to every single expenditure: 'We will look at every new dollar being spent through the lens of how AI and technology can improve service and reduce costs.' The economy will also benefit, the government argues, from AI commercialization, with $46 million pegged over the next four years to connect AI researchers with businesses. This would work alongside a tax credit for small and medium-sized businesses to 'leverage AI to boost their bottom lines, create jobs, and support existing employees.' But a new report by Orgvue, the organizational design and planning software platform, shows that over half of businesses that rushed to impose AI just ended up making their employees redundant without clear gains in productivity. Creating a tax credit for smaller companies to introduce AI seems like a recipe for repeating the same mistake. Much of the Liberal plan seems to involve taking risks. There's a shortsightedness on this rapidly advancing technology that requires significant guardrails. The government seem to view AI as a solutions machine, buying into the hype around it without taking the time to understand it. As policy is properly hashed out in the weeks and months to come, the Liberals' feet will have to be held to the fire on the issue of AI. Canadians must benefit from its limited uses and be protected from its abuses. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organisation bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Jake Pitre, Concordia University Read more: Canada has a chance to lead on AI policy and data governance at the 2025 G7 Leaders' Summit Artificial intelligence should not be allowed to adjudicate cases in Canada's Federal Court AI and criminal justice: How AI can support — not undermine — justice Jake Pitre does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Canada Standard
03-06-2025
- Business
- Canada Standard
What are Canada's governing Liberals going to do about AI?
Fresh off his election victory, Prime Minister Mark Carney has been focused on standing up to Donald Trump's claims on Canada as the 51st state and American tariffs. But while that political drama unfolds, one topic that seems to have quietly slipped under the radar is the rise of artificial intelligence. Despite its transformative impact on everything from jobs to national security, AI received surprisingly little attention during the campaign and in the first weeks following Carney's victory. The consequences of that lack of attention are already starting to show, as emissions and electricity costs continue unabated without a clear vision of where AI fits in. Read more: Anxious over AI? One way to cope is by building your uniquely human skills Although Carney has appointed former journalist Evan Solomon as Canada's first-ever AI minister, it's not yet clear what action the Liberal government plans to take on AI. The Liberals' "Canada Strong" plan outlining the prime minister's proposals is scarce on details. Still, it provides some clues on how the Liberals see AI and what they believe it offers to the Canadian economy - and also what they seem to have misunderstood. First, the plan includes some robust initiatives for improving Canada's digital infrastructure, which lags behind other leading countries, especially in terms of rural broadband and reliable cell service. To accomplish these goals, the Liberals say they'll incentivize investment by "introducing flow-through shares to our Canadian startup raise money faster" for AI and other technologies. In other words, they will reuse the model of mining and oil companies whereby investors can claim a tax deduction for the same amount as their investment. A major question is whether Canada's investment ecosystem has enough big players willing to take these risks. The plan gets less promising as it comes to the implementation of AI within "the economy of tomorrow." The Liberals say they plan to build more data centres, improve computing capacity and create digital supply chain solutions "to improve efficiency and reduce costs for Canadians." All that that sounds OK - so far. But how will they do this? The Liberals plan to establish the Bureau of Research, Engineering and Advanced Leadership in Science (BOREALIS), linking AI development directly to the Canadian Armed Forces and the Communications Security Establishment Canada, which provides the federal government with information technology security and foreign signals intelligence. This approach to AI is focused on what it offers to Canada's defence, whether by manufacturing semiconductors or improving intelligence gathering, so that it can rely less on the U.S. Similarly, Canadian defence tech firms will access funding to help reduce dependence on American suppliers and networks. The Liberals are pledging sovereignty and autonomy for Canada's defence and security, all enabled by "the construction and development of AI infrastructure." What goes unsaid is the intense power needs of data centres, and the consequences for emissions and climate action of "building the next generation of data centres" in Canada. New data centres cannot be built without also constructing more renewable energy infrastructure, and none of this addresses emissions or climate change. If the centres crop up in big numbers as planned, Canadians could also see their electricity costs go up or become less reliable. That's because finding space within the existing grid is not as easy as it may sound when AI data centres require over 100 megawatts (MW) of electricity demand versus five to 10 MW for a regular centre. With the rapidly evolving market for AI-based data centres, Canadian policymakers need to provide clear guidance to utilities in terms of their current decisions on competing industrial-scale demands. As the Canadian Climate Institute points out: "Anything less risks higher rates, increased emissions, missed economic opportunities - or all of the above." So far, the Liberal plan fails to address any of these concerns. What else does the "economy of tomorrow" hold? Apparently, it means more efficient government. According to the Liberal plan, AI "is how government improves service delivery, it is how government keeps up with the speed of business, and it is how government maximizes efficiency and reduces cost." Despite otherwise clashing with the Trump administration, this language is reminiscent of Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which has also centred its use of AI. Read more: DOGE's AI surveillance risks silencing whistleblowers and weakening democracy The Liberals will open an Office of Digital Transformation, which aims to get rid of red tape and "reduce barriers for businesses to operate in Canada." They don't seem to really know what this would actually look like, however. They say: "This could mean using AI to address government service backlogs and improve service delivery times, so that Canadians get better services, faster." Their fiscal plan points out that this frame of thinking applies to every single expenditure: "We will look at every new dollar being spent through the lens of how AI and technology can improve service and reduce costs." The economy will also benefit, the government argues, from AI commercialization, with $46 million pegged over the next four years to connect AI researchers with businesses. This would work alongside a tax credit for small and medium-sized businesses to "leverage AI to boost their bottom lines, create jobs, and support existing employees." But a new report by Orgvue, the organizational design and planning software platform, shows that over half of businesses that rushed to impose AI just ended up making their employees redundant without clear gains in productivity. Creating a tax credit for smaller companies to introduce AI seems like a recipe for repeating the same mistake. Much of the Liberal plan seems to involve taking risks. There's a shortsightedness on this rapidly advancing technology that requires significant guardrails. The government seem to view AI as a solutions machine, buying into the hype around it without taking the time to understand it. As policy is properly hashed out in the weeks and months to come, the Liberals' feet will have to be held to the fire on the issue of AI. Canadians must benefit from its limited uses and be protected from its abuses.
National Observer
21-05-2025
- Business
- National Observer
Will we miss the big picture on Canada's food crisis?
With one in four Canadians living in food-insecure households, and grocery costs having ballooned almost 25 per cent since 2020, Canada is in a food crisis — which will get worse as we face potential trade wars and a recession. These issues demand urgent, concerted action from multiple levels of government. How will the winning Liberal Party rise to the challenge? By analyzing their Canada Strong platform, we can assess which critical food policies the new government is likely to advance — and where food movements will need to apply pressure to secure the transformative changes we urgently need. The good news Let's start with the good news. The Liberal platform commits to protecting Canada's system of supply management of dairy, eggs, and poultry. We should push the Liberals to expand it to other products, like legumes and grains. This would strengthen Canada's food sovereignty and give us more leverage against Trump's aggressive tariffs. The platform also promised to make the National School Food Plan permanent. This is great news, and we need to push for this to be universal and culturally appropriate. The platform also states that, where possible, schools should source Canadian food. This is very promising. School food can be a key lever for strengthening Canada's food systems and making them more resilient, by guaranteeing local farmers a stable source of income. In fact, all government contracts should have a mandated minimum of local procurement: from hospitals to prisons and military cafeterias. This innovative policy would be a huge step in building food sovereignty in Canada. We also see a promise to 'replace Nutrition North'— the government's flagship policy for food security in the North. This suggests an acknowledgment that Nutrition North has failed. In recent years, a supermarket monopoly in northern communities increased its profit margins, while benefiting from Nutrition North subsidies. Instead of propping up a monopoly, they should support Indigenous food methods, like hunting and foraging, and foster retail competition by starting a public grocery store in the territories or supporting cooperative stores. The cost of living crisis Let's move to the most immediate problem facing Canadians: the cost-of-living crisis. The Liberals offer a few boosts and reforms to current benefit programs. But these do little to address the big issue that 60 per cent of food-insecure households have a steady source of income. Incomes are simply too low, and income supports need to be radically re-thought and expanded, not just maintained or incrementally increased. What's more, 40 per cent of Black and Indigenous households experience food insecurity, almost double the national rate. This needs to be treated as a national emergency. The government will have to act fast to address this cost-of-living crisis, shaped by structural racism, that is only going to get worse in a recession. All government contracts should have a mandated minimum of local procurement: from hospitals to prisons and military cafeterias, writes Aaron Vansintjan And remember when Canadians mobilized to boycott Loblaws? Corporate price-gouging and food unaffordability dominated headlines last year and united people across the political spectrum. However, there is little in the platform that promises to address this. Let's say it clearly: the Canadian food retail industry is controlled by an oligopoly. Just five companies control 80 per cent of the retail market. This has led to unfair, anti-competitive and anti-consumer practices. The Liberal Party needs to show it is serious about tackling the problem. First, must strengthen the Competition Bureau to crack down on price-gouging and market domination by a few firms. Second, it should invest in local food infrastructure. We need more support for holistic approaches, such as agroecological, local food hubs, public markets, cooperatives, non-profit grocery stores, small- and medium-sized businesses. The Liberals already acknowledge that, when it comes to housing affordability, the market alone can't fix a market failure. The same lessons need to be applied to food affordability. This is a tremendous opportunity to link the urgent need to protect Canadian producers against trade disruption, with the need to build food sovereignty and lower the cost of living. A broken agriculture system The Liberal platform makes some promises to farmers, but doesn't do nearly enough to grapple with the overwhelming need in the sector. Farmers are being hit by climate change, debt, generational poverty, and sky-high agricultural rents. The current proposals amount to small change for a sector in crisis. There is a way out. Rather than penalizing farmers with an industrial carbon tax or forcing them into debt, the government should support them with training, infrastructure and buffers against risk. For example, the National Farmers Union calls for a Canadian Farm Resilience Agency that trains farmers in low-emission practices. Other policies, such as breaking apart predatory monopolies, expanding rail networks, the right to repair, and support for young, low-income, and minority farmers would go a long way. Notably absent from the platform is any mention of fixing the Temporary Foreign Worker Program, a bedrock of Canadian agricultural labour and rife with abuse. This program is so broken that the UN Special Rapporteur on Modern Slavery called it a 'breeding ground for contemporary slavery' in 2023. It needs serious reform to eliminate exploitation, offer clear paths to citizenship for temporary workers, and improve income and labour conditions on farms. Conclusion: missing the whole The Liberal platform contains promising commitments to supply management, school food, and reforming Nutrition North. But there is not a clear, big picture and little acknowledgment that the food system needs an overhaul. It misses the immense potential to make Canada stronger: against trade wars, climate change and poverty. This would need to cross departmental boundaries. For example, weak local food infrastructure, poor retail competition, a cost-of-living crisis, and a broken temporary worker program are interconnected and multi-sector problems. We need a coordinated, cabinet-level approach to create policy coherence and a cohesive national food strategy. Without a whole-of-government approach, even the positive elements of the platform amount to minor tweaks, missing the potential for system change. The Buy Canadian movement has shown that the public gets it: people want more widely available, local food and do not trust oligopolies to deliver it. People also need higher incomes to be able to afford healthy and culturally-appropriate diets. Right now, the Liberal platform does not meet the public's desire for change. At this moment of global instability, food insecurity and price inflation, we need the Liberals to deliver — our future depends on it.
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
The new Carney government must tackle Canada's outdated system of intergovernmental relations
Throughout the recent federal election campaign, political leaders outlined their vision for Canada's future. Responding to a dramatically changing geopolitical climate, party platforms contained ambitious policy proposals about how to reposition the country for the challenges that lie ahead. Read more: But the leaders were silent about how a new federal government would navigate the division of powers among various levels of government in order to bring their proposals to life. Canada's Constitution separates powers between Ottawa and the provinces based on the principle of divided sovereignty. No order of government is subordinate to the other and, in principle, all governments can act autonomously in their respective areas of jurisdiction. Life would be easy if the problems we faced adhered to the 1867 Constitution Act. Most challenges, however, transcend the individual categories of jurisdiction. Collaboration among jurisdictions is therefore essential to meet the individual and collective needs of Canadians. From apprenticeships to energy corridors, childcare to caregiving, most policy areas require sustained and substantive co-ordination to succeed. Often, like in case of housing and climate change, this must also include municipalities. In addition, intergovernmental co-ordination must finally reflect a nation-to-nation relationship with Indigenous peoples. Nonetheless, the significance of intergovernmental relations in implementing policy continues to be overlooked, including by the victorious Liberals. The Liberal Party's Canada Strong platform refers eight times to nation-building projects. But it fails to acknowledge the need to transform intergovernmental relations for 21st century challenges. Instead, the Constitution is seemingly perceived as a minor inconvenience, not as a key governance challenge: 'We will work with the provinces and territories,' the policy says, seemingly hoping that somehow things will work out. Federal leaders seem oblivious to the fact that Canada is one of the most decentralized federations worldwide. The provinces exercise fiscal and jurisdictional autonomy exceeding those of other countries. In the meantime, the decisions of individual provinces and territories have implications that stretch far beyond their own borders. Take natural resources. Natural resources fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of provinces and, increasingly, the territories. But their development profoundly affects economic and environmental policy. If one province or territory unilaterally decimates the natural resources of their region, it's not just that specific province or territory that bears the consequences. This is just one of many sectors in need of collective consideration so that all of Canada benefits. Read more: There is a simple truth here: orders of government in Canada are not completely autonomous over their areas of jurisdiction. The federal government does not have the legitimate authority to compel provincial-territorial action; in the meantime, provinces and territories have little means to influence federal policy according to the needs and wants of their constituents. Rather than tackling this institutional problem, the federal government often asserts itself as the leader Alternatively, the federal government evokes an ad hoc 'Team Canada' approach in response to imminent crises, like the re-negotiation of the former NAFTA agreement in 2017 and today's threats and tariffs by U.S. President Donald Trump. Read more: Neither option, however, addresses the deeper problem: intergovernmental relations in Canadian federalism are notoriously weak and lack the legitimacy and transparency to bring about effective collective action. Canadian and international research shows that a robust institutional framework is critical for nurturing the key ingredient for effective and legitimate intergovernmental relations: Reciprocity. Regular policy meetings among governments and senior level public servants, especially when backed by sufficient administrative and political support, promotes shared norms and understandings, enhancing the potential for long-term policy solutions. If this type of regular collaboration is entrenched, it would be more difficult to obstruct meaningful collective action that respects Canada's political integrity. Reciprocity is at odds with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith's threats to create a national unity crisis if a list of demands isn't met. It is also at odds with Ottawa's penchant under former prime minister Justin Trudeau to use federal tax dollars to pursue policy objectives that were within provincial jurisdiction. As Mark Carney's new government gets to work, Canadians must question not only the fiscal soundness of its proposals, but also their feasibility considering the deep divisions in Canadian federalism. Without taking tangible steps to reimagine Canada's outdated system of intergovernmental relations or developing a road map for institutional reform, the lasting policy changes that are needed to reposition Canada in an increasingly hostile environment are unlikely to materialize. About 100 Canadian academics recently argued in an open letter, Canada needs to establish a royal commission for securing Canada's future. As past experience has shown, this approach has great potential, but it must be developed in partnership among federal, provincial and territorial governments, including those of First Nations, Métis and Inuit peoples. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organisation bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Jennifer Wallner, L'Université d'Ottawa/University of Ottawa and Jörg Broschek, Wilfrid Laurier University Read more: What the voter gender divide means for Canada's political future Mark Carney's cabinet: A course correction on gender, but there's more work ahead The King's speech: The world will be watching when Charles opens Canada's Parliament Jörg Broschek receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) Jennifer Wallner does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Canada Standard
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Canada Standard
The new Carney government must tackle Canada's outdated system of intergovernmental relations
Throughout the recent federal election campaign, political leaders outlined their vision for Canada's future. Responding to a dramatically changing geopolitical climate, party platforms contained ambitious policy proposals about how to reposition the country for the challenges that lie ahead. Read more: Getting ready for what's next: 4 scenarios for Canada's future in a Trumpian world But the leaders were silent about how a new federal government would navigate the division of powers among various levels of government in order to bring their proposals to life. Canada's Constitution separates powers between Ottawa and the provinces based on the principle of divided sovereignty. No order of government is subordinate to the other and, in principle, all governments can act autonomously in their respective areas of jurisdiction. Life would be easy if the problems we faced adhered to the 1867 Constitution Act. Most challenges, however, transcend the individual categories of jurisdiction. Collaboration among jurisdictions is therefore essential to meet the individual and collective needs of Canadians. From apprenticeships to energy corridors, childcare to caregiving, most policy areas require sustained and substantive co-ordination to succeed. Often, like in case of housing and climate change, this must also include municipalities. In addition, intergovernmental co-ordination must finally reflect a nation-to-nation relationship with Indigenous peoples. Nonetheless, the significance of intergovernmental relations in implementing policy continues to be overlooked, including by the victorious Liberals. The Liberal Party's Canada Strong platform refers eight times to nation-building projects. But it fails to acknowledge the need to transform intergovernmental relations for 21st century challenges. Instead, the Constitution is seemingly perceived as a minor inconvenience, not as a key governance challenge: "We will work with the provinces and territories," the policy says, seemingly hoping that somehow things will work out. Federal leaders seem oblivious to the fact that Canada is one of the most decentralized federations worldwide. The provinces exercise fiscal and jurisdictional autonomy exceeding those of other countries. In the meantime, the decisions of individual provinces and territories have implications that stretch far beyond their own borders. Take natural resources. Natural resources fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of provinces and, increasingly, the territories. But their development profoundly affects economic and environmental policy. If one province or territory unilaterally decimates the natural resources of their region, it's not just that specific province or territory that bears the consequences. This is just one of many sectors in need of collective consideration so that all of Canada benefits. Read more: 'Elbows up' in Canada means sustainable resource development There is a simple truth here: orders of government in Canada are not completely autonomous over their areas of jurisdiction. The federal government does not have the legitimate authority to compel provincial-territorial action; in the meantime, provinces and territories have little means to influence federal policy according to the needs and wants of their constituents. Rather than tackling this institutional problem, the federal government often asserts itself as the leader Alternatively, the federal government evokes an ad hoc "Team Canada" approach in response to imminent crises, like the re-negotiation of the former NAFTA agreement in 2017 and today's threats and tariffs by U.S. President Donald Trump. Read more: Why Alberta's Danielle Smith is rejecting the Team Canada approach to Trump's tariff threats Neither option, however, addresses the deeper problem: intergovernmental relations in Canadian federalism are notoriously weak and lack the legitimacy and transparency to bring about effective collective action. Canadian and international research shows that a robust institutional framework is critical for nurturing the key ingredient for effective and legitimate intergovernmental relations: Reciprocity. Regular policy meetings among governments and senior level public servants, especially when backed by sufficient administrative and political support, promotes shared norms and understandings, enhancing the potential for long-term policy solutions. If this type of regular collaboration is entrenched, it would be more difficult to obstruct meaningful collective action that respects Canada's political integrity. Reciprocity is at odds with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith's threats to create a national unity crisis if a list of demands isn't met. It is also at odds with Ottawa's penchant under former prime minister Justin Trudeau to use federal tax dollars to pursue policy objectives that were within provincial jurisdiction. As Mark Carney's new government gets to work, Canadians must question not only the fiscal soundness of its proposals, but also their feasibility considering the deep divisions in Canadian federalism. Without taking tangible steps to reimagine Canada's outdated system of intergovernmental relations or developing a road map for institutional reform, the lasting policy changes that are needed to reposition Canada in an increasingly hostile environment are unlikely to materialize. About 100 Canadian academics recently argued in an open letter, Canada needs to establish a royal commission for securing Canada's future. As past experience has shown, this approach has great potential, but it must be developed in partnership among federal, provincial and territorial governments, including those of First Nations, Metis and Inuit peoples.
