I think it's a great question.
I might come at it a little differently. First of all, let me just say this. At least in the short-to-medium term I'm probably maybe a bit like you—I hope I'm not reading this into you—I'm a little skeptical about the likelihood that ordinary Canadians are going to use a whole lot of data sets. I'm not.
There are two things. I think if we want to engage them on this and make it meaningful to them there are probably two other ways we have to come at it. One of course is benefits. If there are really important benefits, it's making the public aware, whether it's economic benefits or better outcomes from government or whatever it may be, so that they see that. I would go even further. I would go back to the engagement question and the dialogue question. I would give them some ownership.
What I mean by that is the more we move down this road and the more we solve the short-term, immediate problems of data management and start to raise the bigger questions of what we want to do with this new resource and what we want to do with coal or oil or something else, people have a view on that. If they start to realize that oil is worth a lot of money and it's going to make them rich or poor or it's going to change the world in which they live, they start caring about how it gets used even if they don't know what oil is made of.
We really might want to start thinking about how to manage and make data more valuable and useful and the benefits to flow. Why wouldn't we ask people what they think we should do with it, because what they say will make a difference? They may not be experts on how to integrate it but they are the experts on what we should get out of it at the end. Is it going to make us better off and how?