Natural Resources committee  Absolutely. When we look internally, we've spent probably half of our time trying to collect, correct, curate, glue together different datasets from hundreds or even thousands of data sources. There's massive drag there, and that has two effects: first, it's a loss in productiv

Natural Resources committee  It's a raw resource.

Natural Resources committee  We are that entity, and we don't consume Canadian data as fulsomely as we probably could, given its current structure and state.

Natural Resources committee  I would extend it. I think the notion is that it's independent, but I can understand why some might view the sources and compiler of that data as perhaps influencing in some way. As a consumer, it's helpful to understand and have consistency of source. At the very least, if you

Natural Resources committee  More importantly, you can't access it at perhaps some of these numbers, and at that point you restrict the innovation potential that young people, institutions, maybe not-for-profit institutions, could build an industry on. If it's just about information and collecting what we ha

Natural Resources committee  Very quickly, I have two things. I think that agencies within our own government organizations are grappling with the same issues that we as practitioners are facing. There is a drag on resources that exists today because of the inefficiencies in that system. Secondly, like any

Natural Resources committee  No worries.

Natural Resources committee  I will continue. I think this discussion is rightly focused on the benefits and value that an information agency in Canada could provide and how we might get there. Judith and the other presenters have talked, I think, a great deal about the immediate shortcomings of Canadian dat