[Advisors] FW: My comment on the Open Govt Action Plan draft

[michael gurstein]

Judyth's comments on this are very much worth reading (as are many others) and perhaps, as with me, will stir some additional comments from more folks. .

 

As it happens, the IDRC Open Government Data initiative in which I have a part, and referenced in the government Plan, is actively promoting a (civil society) end user focused strategy i.e. enabling the potential users of Open Data and not simply supporting the (governmental) suppliers something which I attempt to point to in my own comments.

 

With respect to Item D above concerning "Consulting with Canadians", the indicated measures to be undertaken within government would appear to be useful however, they only go part way to ensuring effective consultation (and thus effective participation by Canadians in the governmental process). Many Canadians lack the means--technical, financial, informational -- to take advantage of the opportunities which are being made available. The result of this is that the outcome of these consultations is not necessarily reflective of the Canadian population but is more likely to be skewed by age, gender, location, level of technical literacy, and financial status in parallel to what we know are differentials in overall capacity and means to utilize digital media. To ensure equitable access and thus an equitable opportunity to participate in these consultations initiatives need to be undertaken (or revived) to ensure the means to make effective use of digital media including for activities such as this. Initiatives towards open access or open government must for effective democracy be balanced with initiatives towards inclusive access and inclusive government.

 

M

 

-----Original Message-----

From: Judyth <lapomme at postaccess.com> [mailto:lapomme at postaccess.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 2:52 PM

To: michael gurstein

Subject: My comment on the Open Govt Action Plan draft

 

Dear Michael,

 

I don't know whether our listmates would find my comment (below) of interest but they may well need a reminder to get their own in by the deadline at:

 

http://data.gc.ca/eng/canadas-draft-action-plan-open-government-20

 

[,,,]

 

Canada’s Draft Action Plan on Open Government 2.0 Share this page

 

Your input and comments to date have been instrumental in the development of Canada's Action Plan on Open Government 2.0. Hundreds of ideas and comments have been shared, many of which are reflected throughout the draft version of the Action Plan 2.0.

 

Please review the draft and provide your comments by 12:00 pm EDT on Monday, October 20th.

[...]

 

Regards,

 

Judyth

 

 

--My comment, which may or may not get through the moderator--

 

While much of the draft is laudable in its ambitions, so was the 1.0 plan during which public documents (e.g., in the Library and Archives Canada repository) and publicly funded research (e.g., under Statistics Canada, Environment Canada and the National Research Council) were made UNavailable to Canadians, while Access to Information requests could take years only to yield a refusal of access.

 

It is worrisome that this government appears to believe "open government" means providing online access to information restricted --as to both quantity and kind-- to what is in the current government's political interest, rather than a willingness to make all aspects of government operations open to scrutiny by citizens and the media.

 

It is also difficult to see why a policy designed to inform the public and ensure the transparency and accountability of government should place an emphasis on the *commercialization* of information rather than open access to it, while it does not address the problem of reducing the capacity of government departments to assemble essential information such as was formerly provided by via the long-form census and long-gun registry, both of which assisted other branches of government in the performance of their functions, or the unwisdom of attempting to shut down significant scientific work in progress (e.g., the Experimental Lakes and PEARL projects, and archaeological work in Canada's north) which made valuable contributions to our knowledge of the world.

 

Obviously, the issue of personal privacy is extremely important to Canadians, but neither the census nor the registry led to such privacy breaches as, for example, the loss of drives containing taxpayer information by the Canada Revenue Agency or the improper disposal of unshredded documents in garbage bins when various service points were closed. (Not to mention such "security" measures as were, and are again, proposed to collect comprehensive data on every Canadians personal communications without legal warrants or proper oversight to ensure that such data is not left where hackers can get at it.) But privacy legislation was never intended to shield politicians or public servants from accountability to Parliament or the public for their actions: "open government" is meant to ensure that accountability and, though in some cases the names of individuals should be redacted (e.g., for their personal safety), their actions and policies  should be open to scrutiny.

 

Nobody is disputing the value of fiscal caution and probity or the encouragement of new Canadian businesses providing additional job opportunities for Canadians. However, it is clear that reducing the nation's capacity to collect and study data and the ability of its citizens and their representatives to be fully informed about the workings of government runs contrary to the spirit of Open Government.

 

As we in Quebec have seen clearly through the work of the Charbonneau Inquiry, a lack of transparency of any government all too often leads to corruption and the breaking of ethical rules, to irresponsible people in responsible positions, and to grossly inflated costs for inadequate services at taxpayers' expense. Any Canadian who reads the news is aware that such problems are not confined to Quebec, and that the government of Canada is not immune from criticism on ethical grounds.

 

Surely it would be in the nation's best interests to take the Open Government initiative as seriously at home as we recommend its application in other countries. I would encourage Canada to put itself in the forefront of this initiative by revising its plan so as to ensure that most government information is publicly available, faster, without excessive charges or need for legal actions, and with fewer supressions.

Democracy is best served when the citizens are well informed, and as the saying would have it, "sunlight is the best disinfectant." If the goals of transparency and accountability are to be met even partially by 2016, Canada needs to build those aspects into its two-year implementation plan as priorities.

 

I thank you for this opportunity for Canadians to comment on the draft and trust that you will take their views into account in preparing your final report.

 

--

"Judyth la pomme"

Montreal (Verdun), Quebec

<lapomme at postaccess.com>

http://about.me/mermelsteinjudyth

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://victoria.tc.ca/pipermail/advisors/attachments/20141017/a66cde6d/attachment.html>