A draft of the federal government’s national AI strategy leaked this week. It is called “AI for All,” and the title and frame lets you into almost everything about its posture.
The primary posture of the strategy is about growth. A new growth fund that will take equity stakes in AI companies. A $25 billion sovereign fund designed to help create national champions. New investments in computing power and research. A headline commitment to create 250,000 jobs by 2031.
The underlying logic is clear: build, invest, compete, and ensure Canada captures as much of the economic upside from AI as possible. It’s very Carney-esque.
The quieter part of the strategy is about managing risk. Voluntary watermarking standards. A certification framework. A commitment to modernize online safety legislation. These are largely voluntary or aspirational measures, seeming to rely more on encouragement than enforcement.
The strategy seems to is built around accelerating adoption and investment. However, my polling finds that much of the public conversation remains focused on managing disruption and uncertainty.
To be fair to the government, this should not be surprising. This is very much a Mark Carney document. Carney’s political brand is rooted in economic competence and long-term competitiveness. It makes sense that he would view AI primarily as an economic opportunity that Canada must seize before others do.
The issue is not the objective. But I think it’s more about the sequencing.
Our polling suggests Canadians have not yet elevated AI into a top-tier political issue. In early May, only 8% of Canadians identified AI as one of the three most important issues facing the country. Cost of living was mentioned by 66%. AI is not yet a voting issue for most people.
But that does not mean attitudes toward it are positive.
Our 2025 research found that 61% of Canadians see AI primarily as a threat to jobs, privacy, and social stability, almost twice the proportion who see it mainly as a tool that will improve their lives. Concern outweighs optimism by roughly two to one. Nearly half of working Canadians, 47%, worry AI could force them to change careers. Among those under 30, that rises to 55%. And when we asked Canadians about data centre development, only 16% said they would welcome a facility being built in their own community.
This points to a growing disconnect between policy and the public.
Policymakers and industry leaders tend to view AI through the lens of opportunity and competitiveness. But Canadians view it through the lens of risk, disruption, and uncertainty. There is a widespread belief that technological change is moving faster than governments’ ability to manage it.
The challenge for policymakers is not especially complicated.
Canadians want to know how they will be protected before they hear about how the country will prosper.
They want to know what rules will govern AI, who will enforce them, and what happens when those rules are broken.
They want an honest conversation about how work may change, not simply promises about how many new jobs might be created.
Ultimately, anxiety about AI is not really about the technology itself. It is about precarity. It reflects a broader concern that people’s jobs, livelihoods, and sense of security are becoming less predictable.
That is why public acceptance of AI will depend on more than investment announcements and growth targets. It will depend on whether Canadians believe someone is in charge, that there are rules in place, and that the benefits of this transition will outweigh the risks.
Strategies that focus primarily on growth may find themselves answering a question many Canadians are not yet asking, while leaving their biggest concerns unresolved.
Thanks for reading inFocus with David Coletto! This post is public so feel free to share it.