Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First of all, like my colleagues, I too would like to thank our researchers for putting together a comprehensive, relevant and important information package to get us started. Thank you very much.
My associates have also examined the approaches taken by various governments. Everyone seems to have found case studies and analyses that will enable us to carry out a fairly exhaustive study of proactive disclosure.
I don't want to repeat some of the discussion that's taken place, and I appreciate it very much.
At the last meeting I highlighted a couple of observations I had made about a preliminary, and indeed cursory, review of the information at the time. I was struck, in looking at all the countries, that they appeared to be at different stages--that might be one way of framing it--but that they may have taken different approaches. Indeed, in the United States we saw guidelines. For the purposes of this discussion, they had four components that dealt with publishing information, including creating a culture of openness, improving data quality, and updating policies to allow greater openness. To that extent, I share the thoughts of my colleague, Mr. Easter, on the value of looking at the United States. That may be more where we're at.
Having said that, there have been some comments made here today about hearing from witnesses from other parts of the world or perhaps from folks here who have expertise on other countries. I noted that in Mexico there is a legislated positive duty of proactive disclosure. There was a report and a subsequent action plan in the United Kingdom. Perhaps, anecdotally, if the United Kingdom carries out their action plan like our government does, we would know that there's a firm commitment to get things done and indeed to deliver. That would be something to look at.
Australia has some great reforms, and there was some implementation in New Zealand that we may benefit from hearing about. And of course there is a proactive system of disclosure in Finland.
Those are some things to consider when we're talking about where we're at, and in terms of a possible visit somewhere, from whom and where we might benefit the most. For the purposes of the discussion, I would think that we're more in line with the United States, which has sort of a guidelines approach.
Having said that, I have just a couple of comments. The document called “Recent Developments in Proactive Disclosure--Canada” points out that in April 2010, the Chief Information and Privacy Officer of Ontario is co-hosting a conference, with the City of Toronto and several other groups, called Managing Information in the Public Sector: Shaping the New Information Space. We've confirmed that it is on April 26 and 27. That might be something for us to think about.
I think that would be the extent of my contributions today, at least at this point in the discussion.
Thank you.