Mr. Chair, I would first like to commend our analysts, Dara and Alysia, for their wonderful work. They prepared for us very relevant and comprehensive documents on the issue of proactive disclosure in different Canadian provinces and cities as well as in different countries. This has helped us to get a better idea of what is happening elsewhere. After reading their material, which was quite relevant, I would like to suggest that we proceed as follows.
For starters, perhaps the committee could look at some concrete examples of what is done here, that is in Quebec and in the rest of Canada. We have some examples of what is being done in this area in Quebec. I suggest that we meet with Mr. Jacques Saint-Laurent, the Chair of the Commission d'accès à l'information. He could talk to us about the procedures that have been put in place, the problems that they have encountered, the challenges that they have faced and the adjustments that they have had to make. In short, he could talk to us about the whole process of introducing proactive disclosure in the 15 areas identified.
That said, I also think we need to look at Toronto and Vancouver. We could invite people who have done this type of work in these cities to come here and talk to us about proactive disclosure at the municipal level. Proactive disclosure is commonplace and is done directly. They could give us an idea of how things are done elsewhere in the country.
I also think that we should meet with Ms. Corinne Charette and with Mr. Peter Bruce of the Treasury Board Secretariat, along with Mr. Jacques Saint-Laurent, the Chair of the Commission d'accès à l'information, and with an expert who is now in Toronto, Mr. David Eaves. Mr. Eaves helped to develop the procedure now followed in Vancouver and—and this is something the researchers would need to verify—I believe he worked on the approach now used in Australia. He has worked in both Canada and Australia and is now based in Toronto.
I would also add to the suggested witness list Mr. David Wallace, Toronto's Chief Information Office. We could invite him to appear before the committee, along with another important resource person, Mr. Mark Vale, Ontario's Privacy Officer. It would be just as quick if I were to give you my list of suggested witnesses.
Other possible witnesses include a CIO in Toronto and a CIO in the United States. If the committee was prepared to travel to the United States, it could meet with Mr. Vivek Kundra, the Federal Chief Information Officer, to discuss how things were done there. They are the persons best qualified to report on how things are done elsewhere.
I also understand that the Lac Carling Congress is scheduled to meet this year. The congress brings together information workers from all three levels of government, that is municipal, provincial and federal. The most important item on this year's agenda is the use of new technologies for public information purposes. I think we need to take a look at the work of the congress and at the outcomes of their session, since participants are experts on access to information issues at all three levels of government, namely municipal, provincial and federal. They are genuine experts and at this session, they will be looking at ways of making information accessible.
I have several more suggestions. I could give you my list and add a few more names to it, but I think I have all the information on these persons and on the work they have done, in Australia as well as in the United States.
These meetings and discussions will truly give us an opportunity to see how access to information can be facilitated so that Canada can be an open and transparent democracy that is accessible to all citizens.