AI law and policy in Canada
5 instruments relevant to AI in Canada are indexed here, 1 of them binding law, none of which names AI or deepfakes in its title.
Governance readiness 5 of 10 points on the governance readiness index, which records how much machinery exists, not how strict it is. AI Governance Readiness Index This site Our own editorial coding from primary legal sources, not an objective measurement. Every score cites a specific instrument and article. "Readiness" means the machinery exists to govern AI. It is emphatically not a judgement that the resulting rules are good, proportionate, or well enforced. Cite AI Safety Tracker, "AI Governance Readiness Index". https://aisafetytracker.org/methodology/governance-readiness/. Retrieved 23 October 2026.
Statutes
Act of Parliament. Binding on everyone it applies to.
-
Parliament of Canada
The federal private-sector privacy statute, and with provincial equivalents the main binding constraint on commercial AI in Canada. Its reform was bundled into the same bill as the AI statute, so both fell together.
- privacy
Binding on government only
Binds government agencies only, not the wider market.
-
Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
Requires an Algorithmic Impact Assessment before a federal department deploys an automated decision system, with obligations scaled to the assessed impact level. The first instrument of its kind anywhere and still among the most concrete, and it binds government rather than the market.
- government use
- transparency
Voluntary standards
Guidance with no legal force. Compliance is a choice.
-
Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
Signed by a list of named Canadian developers. With the statute gone this is the operative federal expectation of generative AI developers, and it carries no consequence for ignoring it.
- safety
- transparency
Proposed, not law
Proposed, consulted on, or before Parliament. Creates no duties yet.
-
Parliament of Canada
Tabled in June 2026 to modernise the federal private-sector privacy law. It would require transparency about automated decision-making in significant decisions about individuals, administered by a new Digital Safety and Data Protection Commission. It contains no AI statute of the kind AIDA was.
- privacy
- transparency
Reviews and inquiries
An inquiry or review. Evidence and recommendations, not obligations.
-
Parliament of Canada
Would have been the second comprehensive national AI statute after the EU's. It died when Parliament was prorogued in January 2025 and has not been reintroduced. Listed because it is still frequently cited as Canadian law.
- safety
- discrimination
About this index
Compiled here from primary instruments and licensed MIT.
1 of the 5 instruments here are binding law, and 0 of those name AI. The remainder apply to AI without naming it, so a keyword search of the statute book does not find them.
Topics covered: discrimination, government use, privacy, safety, transparency. A build check probes every citation on this page, because a link that returns a 404 looks like evidence and is not.
This is not legal advice. It is not a compliance checklist and it is not exhaustive. Commencement dates, proposals and enforcement positions move; the review date is on every record. If something here is wrong, say so and it gets fixed and listed rather than quietly patched.