Bill 269 includes needed protections for victims of AI-generated intimate images. But its expansion of SCAN powers could put innocent tenants at risk.
This week, I wrote to the Nova Scotia Legislature’s Standing Committee on Public Bills about Bill 269, called the Public Safety Act. It is a large bill. It changes eight laws and creates a new one. It deals with several very different matters: intimate images shared without consent, 911 privacy, hospital helicopter flight paths, conservation officers, problem properties, and organizations tied to terrorism.
Some parts deserve support. The strongest part of Bill 269 addresses intimate images, including those created or altered by artificial intelligence. Right now, a person whose private image is shared without permission may have to prove they did not agree to it. Bill 269 would change that. It would presume there was no consent unless the person who shared the image can prove otherwise.
That is the right approach. The bill would also cover AI-generated fake images, often called deepfakes. A young woman can now have her face put on an image or video she was never part of. The harm can be real and lasting, even though the image is fake.
Bill 269 would also allow people to withdraw consent by asking a court to order the removal of material and to protect a victim’s name in court. These are sensible changes. They should pass without delay.
The bill also updates privacy and cybersecurity rules for the 911 system. It protects helicopter routes to hospital helipads. Both are needed. When someone in Colchester County needs an air ambulance to Halifax, every minute matters.
But there is a serious problem with the bill and parts of it that worry me. It puts too many unrelated matters into one package. Protecting a young person from an AI fake image has nothing to do with closing a rental building or dissolving a co-operative. These should be separate bills.
When everything is bundled together, MLAs are forced to choose. They may have to vote against good measures because they are worried about other parts of the bill. That is not good law-making.
My main concern is the change to the Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Act, commonly known as SCAN. Under SCAN, the province can investigate a property suspected of being used for illegal activity. It can then ask a court to close the property. The people living there can be forced out, even if no one has been charged or convicted of a crime. Bill 269 would widen the list of activities covered by SCAN. It would allow confidential complaints and increase the possible closure period from 90 days to one full year.
Nobody wants drug trafficking, stolen goods, human trafficking, or sexual exploitation in their community. Those are real problems. Neighbours should be able to report serious wrongdoing without fear. But a closure order affects everyone in a building, not just the person causing the trouble. In a housing crisis, an innocent tenant could lose their home for up to a year because of somebody else’s actions. SCAN could also be misused in a landlord-tenant dispute or in an abusive household. The person who needs protection could be the one who loses their home.
That is why I asked the committee to split Bill 269. Pass the urgent protections for victims of intimate-image abuse. But take more time to study the SCAN changes, hear from tenants, women’s shelters, Legal Aid, and others who deal with these cases every day. Public safety and civil liberties do not have to be in conflict. Nova Scotia can protect people from real harm while also making sure the law is fair.
Good laws protect people. Bad laws, or rushed laws, can hurt the very people they are meant to protect. Bill 269 contains important changes that should pass. But it also gives the government new powers that could cost innocent people their homes or their rights. The Legislature should split this bill, pass the urgent protections, and give the rest the careful scrutiny it deserves.
