As it relates to the development of the voluntary code, a key component was obviously that those who would actually implement it and be signatories to the implementation of the code were principally involved in its structure.
That said, we also went broadly to a number of academics and civil society actors. I think we're still very open to the conversations around its function, particularly because the G7 Hiroshima process continues. Canada will continue to work on both the principles to the development of AI foundation models and the code of conduct that we imagine will emerge internationally through the G7 process.
As it relates to the relationship between the code and regulation, we have been clear that the code is not regulation and the code will not be regulation. This is a bridge between now and when regulation will be in place.
That said, it would be silly of us—and it was not our intent—to make the code anathema to where we would ultimately head. Its principles are actually related to the principles and the general pillars that are related to the companion document we produced on AIDA. The general headings are the same.
In many ways, therefore, signing on now and and beginning the important work of actually doing the risk assessment, mitigation, transparency and accountability work related to generative AI will put companies in very good stead when we actually have regulatory systems in place.