[Advisors] a foundation funding model
James Van Leeuwen
jvl at ventus.ca
Thu, 15 Dec 2011 15:10:11 -0700
--Apple-Mail=_4B086A00-5A6F-43F5-9860-9E1545541224
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=us-ascii
If the federal government is the target, the critical question to start =
with is "What do they care about?"
A key observation in Garth's document is that the federal government =
(still) has no Digital Strategy.
A more salient observation is that the federal government has virtually =
no strategic capacity for anything, other than protecting Canada's =
massively vested interests in primary resource production.=20
That strategy is now blowing up in their faces (Kyoto, Durban, etc.).=20
Canada is a backwater in the Digital Economy because most of the country =
including government is not looking for a new gravy train to ride.=20
We are not suffering an economic crisis. Most Canadians believe the =
country is relatively immune from economic crisis, because the world =
will always need what we produce blah blah blah.
We will get our asses kicked sooner than later, but for now there is no =
incentive other than private profit driving development of Canada's =
digital economy.
With the notable exception of RIM, we aren't even in the game. And RIM =
is not looking like a global contender these days.=20
Any proposed solution for CAP funding that involves the federal =
government must align with Conservative priorities and their =
corresponding strategies.
Pragmatism is critical here, and that means principles have to be =
compromised.
Making this a social justice/inclusion issue will merely inflame =
dogmatic, knee-jerk vindictiveness on the part of the Conservatives, =
which would obviously be counterproductive.
An issue that Canadian government and industry alike really care about =
these days is the looming shortage of skilled labour.
It has the potential to cripple almost every industry in the country =
over the coming decade, and it is practically certain to further =
compromise Canada's economic productivity (we already suck, per capita).
We will need hundreds of thousands of new skilled workers to take up the =
slack, and this is probably the best possible leverage for securing =
program funding from any provincial or federal government.
Rural and remote Canada including First Nations is a vast pool of =
potential talent.
Providing access to education and training will be critically important =
to tapping this pool, and Internet access will play a fundamental role.
Define the roles and outcomes that 'NewCAP' could deliver in meeting =
this critical need, and build the proposal around them.
Brand the initiative so that its purpose is clear, and so that the brand =
makes it easy for the Conservatives to sell.=20
The Policy Advisor for the Industry Minister made the 'rebranding' point =
for a reason.=20
CAP is fundamentally a social program, and sounds like one.=20
NewCAP has to be an economic productivity and wealth creation program, =
and it has to sound like one.
Sorry Marita, BUT they won't sell something called COIL :^)
Hope this helps.
JvL
P.S.: I met with the Director of our local library yesterday. She says =
two thirds of their CAP site users are from the First Nation down the =
road.=20
The FN doesn't have its own CAP site, and without FN patronage, our =
local CAP site wouldn't have the numbers to make it work.
The library is about to undergo a major community-funded renovation to =
expand digital learning capacity.=20
The community investment would give them much better leverage with =
government funding programs... if there were any.=20
On 2011-12-13, at 8:45 AM, Marita Moll wrote:
>=20
> I have looked over discussion we had exactly this time last year on a =
new vision for CAP. It pointed right back to a document developed by =
Garth a few years ago. It has lots of nice elements and we could =
improve and wordsmith it forever. A copy is attached but let`s not go =
back there right now. If we want to continue to benefit from a federal =
contribution to this program, it seems pretty clear that we need to =
propose a new funding model!!! that they can buy into.
>=20
> So, just to get us all started, here is one idea:
>=20
> We suggest that funding be continued under the infrastructure program =
for one more year. I'm not sure who is ultimately in charge of the =
infrastructure funding -- if it is Treasury Board (Clement) we would be =
lucky.
>=20
> Over the next year, a foundation structure should be set up to take =
over the program. This foundation could be kick started with $1B?? from =
the upcoming spectrum auction. Whatever the amount, it should be enough =
to generate income that would provide core funding at the current level =
for about 3500 sites across the country and residual funds that could =
act as a micro loan agency to community sites needing help setting up =
income generating services to grow the centers. The CRTC also has =
funding pockets that could feed into such a model -- if they wanted to.
>=20
> A new name? How about the Community Online Internet Legacy (COIL) =
fund.
>=20
> If we do some agreement here, let's remember that the kiss of death to =
any strategy is its adoption by the opposition. Whatever the idea, we =
need to get it to inside champions and see if it flies (maybe even this =
fellow Winchester we met with). If we can't keep the program alive =
during this government's mandate, well ..... I'll let you fill in the =
rest.
>=20
> Your thoughts
>=20
> Marita <CAPvision-Internet Tree.doc>
--Apple-Mail=_4B086A00-5A6F-43F5-9860-9E1545541224
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=us-ascii
<html><head></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; =
"><div>If the federal government is the target, the critical question to =
start with is "What do they care =
about?"</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>A key observation in =
Garth's document is that the federal government (still) has no Digital =
Strategy.</div><div><br></div><div>A more salient observation is that =
the federal government has virtually no strategic capacity for anything, =
other than protecting Canada's massively vested interests in primary =
resource production. </div><div><br></div><div>That strategy is now =
blowing up in their faces (Kyoto, Durban, =
etc.). </div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Canada is a =
backwater in the Digital Economy because most of the country including =
government is not looking for a new gravy train to =
ride. </div><div><br></div><div>We are not suffering an economic =
crisis. Most Canadians believe the country is relatively immune from =
economic crisis, because the world will always need what we produce blah =
blah blah.</div><div><br></div><div>We will get our asses kicked sooner =
than later, but for now there is no incentive other than private profit =
driving development of Canada's digital =
economy.</div><div><br></div><div>With the notable exception of RIM, we =
aren't even in the game. And RIM is not looking like a global contender =
these days. </div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Any proposed =
solution for CAP funding that involves the federal =
government <b>must</b> align with Conservative priorities and =
their corresponding strategies.</div><div><br></div><div>Pragmatism is =
critical here, and that means principles have to be =
compromised.</div><div><br></div><div>Making this a social =
justice/inclusion issue will merely inflame dogmatic, knee-jerk =
vindictiveness on the part of the Conservatives, which would obviously =
be counterproductive.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>An issue =
that Canadian government and industry alike really care about these days =
is the looming shortage of skilled labour.</div><div><br></div><div>It =
has the potential to cripple almost every industry in the country over =
the coming decade, and it is practically certain to further compromise =
Canada's economic productivity (we already suck, per =
capita).</div><div><br></div><div>We will need hundreds of thousands of =
new skilled workers to take up the slack, and this is probably the =
best possible leverage for securing program funding from any provincial =
or federal government.</div><div><br></div><div><div>Rural and remote =
Canada including First Nations is a vast pool of potential =
talent.</div><div><br></div><div>Providing access to education and =
training will be critically important to tapping this pool, and Internet =
access will play a fundamental =
role.</div><div><br></div></div><div><br></div><div>Define the roles and =
outcomes that 'NewCAP' could deliver in meeting this critical need, and =
build the proposal around them.</div><div><br></div><div>Brand the =
initiative so that its purpose is clear, and so that the brand makes it =
easy for the Conservatives to sell. </div><div><br></div><div>The =
Policy Advisor for the Industry Minister made the 'rebranding' point for =
a reason. </div><div><br></div><div>CAP is fundamentally a social =
program, and sounds like one. </div><div><br></div><div>NewCAP has =
to be an economic productivity and wealth creation program, and it has =
to sound like one.</div><div><br></div><div>Sorry Marita, BUT they won't =
sell something called COIL :^)</div><div><br></div><div>Hope this =
helps.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>JvL</div><div><br></div><di=
v><br></div><div>P.S.: I met with the Director of our local library =
yesterday. She says two thirds of their CAP site users are from the =
First Nation down the road. </div><div><br></div><div>The FN =
doesn't have its own CAP site, and without FN patronage, our local CAP =
site wouldn't have the numbers to make it =
work.</div><div><br></div><div>The library is about to undergo a major =
community-funded renovation to expand digital learning =
capacity. </div><div><br></div><div>The community investment would =
give them much better leverage with government funding programs... if =
there were =
any. </div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><div>On =
2011-12-13, at 8:45 AM, Marita Moll wrote:</div><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div><br>I =
have looked over discussion we had exactly this time last year on a new =
vision for CAP. It pointed right back to a document developed by =
Garth a few years ago. It has lots of nice elements and we could =
improve and wordsmith it forever. A copy is attached but let`s not =
go back there right now. If we want to continue to benefit from a =
federal contribution to this program, it seems pretty clear that we need =
to propose a new funding model!!! that they can buy into.<br><br>So, =
just to get us all started, here is one idea:<br><br>We suggest that =
funding be continued under the infrastructure program for one more year. =
I'm not sure who is ultimately in charge of the infrastructure =
funding -- if it is Treasury Board (Clement) we would be =
lucky.<br><br>Over the next year, a foundation structure should be set =
up to take over the program. This foundation could be kick started =
with $1B?? from the upcoming spectrum auction. Whatever the =
amount, it should be enough to generate income that would provide core =
funding at the current level for about 3500 sites across the country and =
residual funds that could act as a micro loan agency to community sites =
needing help setting up income generating services to grow the centers. =
The CRTC also has funding pockets that could feed into such a =
model -- if they wanted to.<br><br>A new name? How about the =
Community Online Internet Legacy (COIL) fund.<br><br>If we do some =
agreement here, let's remember that the kiss of death to any strategy is =
its adoption by the opposition. Whatever the idea, we need to get =
it to inside champions and see if it flies (maybe even this fellow =
Winchester we met with). If we can't keep the program alive during =
this government's mandate, well ..... I'll let you fill in the =
rest.<br><br>Your thoughts<br><br>Marita =
<span><CAPvision-Internet =
Tree.doc></span></div></blockquote></div><br></body></html>=
--Apple-Mail=_4B086A00-5A6F-43F5-9860-9E1545541224--