Evidence of meeting #42 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was public.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Ultimately, won't property developers make the same argument about city-held land or something like that? They'll say, “As taxpayers we own this land, so why are we paying for it twice?”
5:10 p.m.
Director, Information Technology Services and Chief Information Officer, City Operations, City of Ottawa
I am not a city developer. I consider myself a technical person. I'm here to serve the public. The public has paid for that data already. I just give it back to them.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Thank you very much.
There's just one issue that I'd like a comment on from Ms. Ballem and Monsieur Michaud. That is on the whole issue of liability. You've indicated that certain geophysical data is published on your data sets. Let us assume that the data was inaccurate through an error being made by one of your staff members and that it was relied upon by--let's assume for the purposes of this discussion--an engineering firm or an architectural firm.
Let's assume that as a result of the erroneous data, the building was built or there was some construction done and it was not built according to code, or the wrong materials were used, or there was some major problem, and that as a result there was a liability. I know that you people would have disclaimers and all of this, but I'm not sure they would hold up in court.
Have you ever thought of this, or is this an issue that has ever been canvassed by your staff? What would happen? Of course, cities would be looked at in this as having the deep pockets in a lawsuit, so is this an issue that has ever been talked about or discussed? What are your thoughts on it?
Madam Ballem first, please.
5:10 p.m.
City Manager, City of Vancouver
Yes. It is an issue that is discussed at length. I think Monsieur Michaud can probably give you a more detailed answer.
But of course on the liability and the issue of indemnification of staff and the government itself, it was something that as soon as you...and I would say to the member's question earlier on, if there is anything at the federal level that will slow you down, it will be your in-house legal support, who will have many, many reasons for why you cannot release data.
We, too, have our in-house legal counsel. They started out by being very nervous about this, but I think we work through discussions, and we continue to evolve the framework that actually allows us to put out what in some cases is likely and inevitably to be imperfect data but still feel comfortable that we are protected and not putting our governments at undue risk.
5:15 p.m.
Director, Information Technology Services and Chief Information Officer, City Operations, City of Ottawa
At the city, since day one we have involved the legal department to see what the risks were with the data we were putting out there. Also, working with my colleagues in the G-4, we engaged a think tank here in Ottawa to look at all the legal aspects of open data from a licensing point of view, liability, and so on, and we compared various provincial legislation to see what the common grounds were.
We are supposed to get the report, I believe, next week, and that will be shared with the other participants of the G-4 and with anybody who requests a copy of the report.
So yes, we did consider liabilities, but they're not really a source of concern at this point. The point I would like to make is if you get a lawsuit because your data is not accurate, this is the data you're using right now, so you're going to get sued anyway. There is nothing magic about what we're doing.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Thank you very much.
Ms. Davidson, go ahead for up to five minutes.
Mr. Calandra wanted a few minutes at the end. Then we're going to adjourn.
Ms. Davidson.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Patricia Davidson Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to ask Dr. Ballem just a couple of questions.
In your remarks you said that you started with 75 data sets and that there was a significant investment made to make these user-friendly. I just wonder if you could elaborate a little bit more on what “significant investment” means.
Then you also said that some of the departments--engineering, for example--were initially a little bit nervous about the integrity of the data and so on. Then I thought you said you had developed tools so that people could use the data correctly. Could you tell me a little bit about that as well, please?
5:15 p.m.
City Manager, City of Vancouver
In terms of the actual comfort with releasing our data, that is a very common thing you will encounter. It's to the point that Mr. Michaud made: departments know their data is imperfect, but somehow they think if nobody else knows that, then they're not so concerned. It's the same data whether you make it publicly available or not. What we are finding is that our partners are coming back to us and helping us on a much more rapid basis to actually improve our data. That is actually invaluable. The impact it is having is exactly the opposite of what we feared.
I'm not an expert on the development of tools. I do know, though, that there has been a lot of science with regard to what I would call translational tools that take a shift in data and convert it into what I would call a story so that somebody can understand what that data is telling them. It's really a significant area of innovation right now, which we're using. Whether it's through applications or other kinds of tools, we're actually helping to take data sets that for years public servants and some professionals have used, and we're trying to take them to a place where really anybody could use them without having to be trained extensively.
In terms of the resources we put into this, at the direction of our mayor and council we rolled out this initiative at a time when we were significantly constrained and actually finding areas of savings and efficiencies across our organization, so it wasn't a time of great largesse in our budget process. We had to commit a number of staff to doing the ramp-up of this initiative. We've now reorganized our whole information management and information technology department so that it works as a unified platform for our whole organization, which wasn't the case before when it was quite disparate.
We have both made an investment of staff time and, in some cases, spent some money to allow us to purchase some of the software that is helpful to us, but a lot of what we've come back with has been developed by our partners. As Mr. Michaud has said, there's a huge amount of free, in-kind contribution by not the developers community but the development community, which is so keen to help us move along this route that they are giving their time, their expertise, and, in some cases, their intellectual property for us to use.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Thank you, Ms. Davidson.
Okay, that concludes the questions.
I'm going to invite any of the three witnesses, if they have any brief closing remarks they want to leave the committee with, to do so, and then we will go on to other committee business at that point in time.
We'll start with Dr. Ballem.
5:20 p.m.
City Manager, City of Vancouver
First of all,
I want to thank you once again for giving us the opportunity to speak.
It's been a real privilege to be here and to discuss this.
I would only say, fill your boots; go for it. It's an amazing thing to do. Know that you will get initial resistance from your departments because it makes them nervous. I think those of us who've been there understand that, but they have colleagues at another level of government who have experience, who are starting to establish some standards and some practical applications of how to move forward quickly. We are willing to share.
5:20 p.m.
Assistant Commissioner, Access, Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario
Some of the discussion about liability brought some memories back to me. Part of my job is to adjudicate access to information appeals. The government agencies come to me and say they can't release that information for such and such a reason. I've probably heard and read it all. There are solutions to these things. These should not be impediments. These are things that have answers. Transparency and accountability are important principles. We encourage you to move forward.
5:20 p.m.
Director, Information Technology Services and Chief Information Officer, City Operations, City of Ottawa
Thank you for inviting us here today.
The experience of the City of Ottawa has surpassed all our expectations. We are cooperating with other municipalities in developing common standards and tools. For instance, an application developed for the City of Ottawa can easily be transferred to Toronto, Edmonton or Vancouver, or to any other municipality.
The key to our success has been cooperation among the various municipalities and the fact that the community has been involved in the process.
I'm encouraging you guys to go for it. I'm telling you to go for it.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
On behalf of all members of the committee, I want to thank you for your appearance here today. This was interesting, and you've aided the committee's deliberations considerably.
We're now going to move to Mr. Calandra, who wanted a few minutes of the committee's time.
Mr. Calandra, the floor is yours.
February 7th, 2011 / 5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON
Mr. Chair, I wanted to see if either you or the clerk could update me with respect to the CBC and changes in the hearing dates, as we discussed at the end of the last meeting.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Yes, we had communication with the parties involved. They weren't able to accommodate us at an earlier date.
Perhaps I'll ask the clerk to speak in more detail.
5:20 p.m.
The Clerk of the Committee Mr. Chad Mariage
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I was in contact with the CBC last week as per the committee's recommendation. They wrote back saying that our previous negotiations allowed for some give and take. They were ready to come on March 21, and there didn't seem to be any alternate dates that were convenient for them.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON
What dates might we have available in advance of March 21?
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
The schedule has been circulated to everyone. On February 9 and 14, we have confirmed witnesses. On February 16, we have one or two confirmed witnesses. There's always some possibility. Then we're into March after that. We have hearings scheduled on this study for February 28, March 2, March 7, and March 9. The committee is trying to get this wrapped up by March 9.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
5:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
It depends on whether these witnesses confirm or not. For March 9 and some other dates, we're still at the e-mail stage. March 9 is our United Kingdom panel, and we don't yet have it firmed up. These are ongoing discussions we're having with the individuals.
As you can see from the schedule that has been circulated, we are doing pretty good. The U.K. panel hasn't really been firmed up yet, and we're still waiting for one or two of the Australians. The United States is pretty well confirmed.
I'd just point out that with respect to one of the witnesses not confirmed on the 16th, that date has been given to him as an alternate.