Civil Society Coalition Launches Independent 'People's Consultation' on AI Policy

In a significant move challenging the current trajectory of Canadian artificial intelligence regulation, a coalition of over 160 human rights organizations, civil liberties groups, and academic experts has launched an independent "People's Consultation." This initiative emerges as a direct response to what critics describe as a federally led process heavily skewed toward the interests of the technology sector.

The consultation, announced on January 25, 2026, invites the Canadian public to submit their perspectives on the societal impacts of AI. The findings are intended to be delivered to the federal government to influence the country’s first comprehensive national AI strategy. This parallel process underscores a growing divide between government policymakers and civil society regarding the speed and scope of AI regulation.

A Response to "Rushed" Federal Policy Making

The impetus for this independent inquiry stems from dissatisfaction with the federal government's recent approach to AI governance. Led by AI Minister Evan Solomon, the federal administration recently concluded a 30-day "sprint" consultation in October 2025. Critics argue this timeframe was insufficient for a technology with such far-reaching implications.

Cynthia Khoo, a technology and human rights lawyer and senior fellow at the University of Toronto's Citizen Lab, emphasized the necessity of this alternative channel. "We basically didn't feel like we had a choice," Khoo stated, referencing the government's accelerated timeline. She noted that the stakeholders most likely to be negatively impacted by AI deployment—marginalized communities and workers—were not given adequate time or space to voice their concerns during the official process.

The coalition argues that the government’s AI task force lacks diversity, disproportionately representing the tech industry while underrepresenting labor, environmental, and human rights perspectives. This "People's Consultation" aims to rectify that imbalance by keeping its submission window open until March 15, 2026, offering a more deliberate pace for public discourse.

Diverging Priorities: Industry Speed vs. Public Safety

The core of the dispute lies in the conflicting priorities of maintaining global competitiveness versus ensuring robust social safeguards. While the federal government views rapid AI adoption as essential for Canada's economic standing, civil society groups warn that speed should not come at the cost of democratic oversight.

Aislin Jackson, policy staff counsel at the B.C. Civil Liberties Association, highlighted specific risks that the federal task force has allegedly overlooked. "Complex areas need to be understood in their full complexity in order to be regulated well and appropriately," Jackson said. She pointed to the use of algorithmic tools in hiring as a critical area where efficiency is often prioritized over fairness, potentially automating discrimination against job seekers.

The table below outlines the distinct differences between the government's approach and the newly launched independent consultation:

Comparison of AI Consultation Approaches

Emerging Concerns: Infrastructure and Sovereignty

Beyond algorithmic bias, the People's Consultation is bringing attention to the physical and political infrastructure of AI. Environmental concerns are at the forefront, particularly regarding the energy consumption of AI data centers. As Canada positions itself as a hub for digital infrastructure, critics like Khoo warn that local communities may bear the brunt of increased energy costs and resource depletion.

Furthermore, the consultation raises questions about digital sovereignty. While the federal government emphasizes "Canadian digital sovereignty" in the face of U.S. and Chinese tech dominance, Indigenous advocates are calling for a distinct recognition of Indigenous digital sovereignty. This nuanced debate questions who ultimately owns and benefits from the data used to train massive AI models.

Government Reaffirms Multi-Stakeholder Engagement

In response to the launch of the independent consultation, the Ministry of AI and Digital Innovation has defended its methodology. A spokesperson for the ministry stated that the October public questionnaire was merely one component of a broader engagement strategy.

The government asserts that it has sought advice through various channels, including targeted roundtables, informal discussions, and ongoing engagement with civil society and labor representatives. Officials maintain that all input, including that from the new People's Consultation, will be carefully reviewed as work continues on the national AI strategy.

The Path Forward for Canadian AI Regulation

As the March 15 deadline for the People's Consultation approaches, the findings are expected to place significant pressure on federal policymakers to broaden the scope of the national AI strategy. The coalition intends to make all submissions public, creating a transparent record of public sentiment that will be difficult for legislators to ignore.

For the AI industry, this development signals a potential shift in the regulatory landscape. If the coalition's recommendations gain traction, future legislation may include stricter compliance requirements regarding data ethics, environmental impact assessments, and algorithmic transparency.

The launch of this consultation marks a critical moment in the global conversation on AI governance, positioning Canada as a testing ground for how effectively civil society can influence high-tech policy in the face of rapid industrial advancement.