The House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage met to study the impacts of artificial intelligence on the creative industries. Nine witnesses appeared: Alexandra Kearney, Wyatt Tessari L'Allié, Adrian Capobianco, Alain Strati and Lisa Broadfoot of the Canadian Media Producers Association, Jonathan Roberge and Étienne Grenier of the Quebec research chair on francophone AI and digital technology, and Laurent Dubois and Véronyque Roy of the Société des auteurs et autrices de radio, télévision et cinéma.
Alexandra Kearney, co-founder of Artificial Agency, described her company's work building agentic AI systems that enable game characters to improvise within designer-set boundaries, expanding the artistic medium rather than replacing human authorship. She argued that blanket restrictions on generative AI risk stifling new interactive formats and urged policy-makers to distinguish agentic AI from other generative systems, warning against regulating problem formulations like reinforcement learning. She recommended that the government protect Canada's three AI research institutes and bring technical experts into regulatory discussions.
Wyatt Tessari L'Allié, founder of AI Governance and Safety Canada, warned that smarter-than-human AI will soon surpass humans in all domains, including content creation, and that current generative models that rely on copyrighted data are a passing phase. He called for a whole-of-government pivot to meet this "AI crisis," for Canada to spearhead global coordination talks, and for piloting support measures in the creative industries that could later apply to other sectors. He disagreed with the premise that licensing human data will sustain artists, arguing that future AI will not need human content.
Adrian Capobianco, CEO of BILI Social, described how his company uses AI to match brands with social media influencers, refine text posts, and help creators deliver content in multiple languages, enabling Canadian firms to compete against larger international players. He framed AI as a tool for the "assist, not the goal" and asked for government support, funding and encouragement to accelerate AI adoption for small businesses.
Alain Strati and Lisa Broadfoot of the Canadian Media Producers Association argued that generative AI should not be treated as a monolith and that existing copyright law is sufficient, opposing any new text and data mining exception. They called for a transparent, opt-in licensing market where rights holders can negotiate consent and compensation for use of their works in AI training, and noted that producers already use AI tools for operational efficiencies. They stressed that transparency is essential for accountability and for identifying infringement.
Jonathan Roberge, a professor at INRS, criticized Canadian Heritage for lacking a research-based cultural policy on AI, noting that his chair has never received a research mandate from the department. He argued that the government is biased toward AI development at the expense of cultural industries and that Canada needs a coherent strategy grounded in evidence, not a techno-centric approach. He disagreed with the notion that Canada "punches above its weight," calling that characterization misleading.
Étienne Grenier, a doctoral student, emphasized that cultural workers and artists must be included in AI consultation processes and supported in reclaiming agency over the technology. He pointed to the absence of the cultural sector in Canada's $2 billion sovereign AI compute strategy and called for open data, training tools, and consistent funding for community-led AI projects. He argued that the government should support "super users" in the cultural sector who can bridge technical and creative expertise.
Laurent Dubois and Véronyque Roy of SARTEC warned that generative AI is being used to replace scriptwriters rather than assist them, threatening job losses and cultural diversity. They called for a strict framework based on authorization, transparency and compensation, and stressed that creators must have the power to opt in to licensing arrangements. Dubois argued that AI is not a revolution but a major innovation that requires democratic dialogue, and that without a clear framework, the sector faces "survival of the fittest."
The meeting concluded with a procedural debate. Rachael Thomas moved a motion to invite witnesses to testify about missing artworks from the Indigenous Art Centre, but the chair ruled it out of order as not related to the current study. Thomas challenged the chair, and the committee voted to uphold the chair's ruling. She then gave notice that she would reintroduce the motion at a future meeting.
AI-generated summary — may contain errors; verify against the official evidence.