Comments: Federal Open Government Action Plan...
Locked
Comments: Federal Open Government Action Plan...
 
|
I just read this, and here are my quick reflections:
Progress is being made, but with teeny tiny steps. Transparency: There is nothing in there about transparency, which mean pipeline information will still be inaccessible, administrative data are only alluded to, when programs are cancelled (e.g. Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences (CFCAS), CPRN) where do those data go so I am not sure if access to HIFIS will ever be available. Regulation can still be changed behind closed doors, cabinet memos remain secret, and so on. Organizations like Centre for Law and Democracy and Democracy Watch have been watching this closely and they can better than I speak to that issue. Archiving Data: Nothing is said about the preservation of data and information related to cancelled programs, or scientific and research data in general. There will be additional access to some archived material once clearance has been removed, but nothing in the plan about the archiving and preservation of data nor digitization. For example the Polar Environment Atmospheric Research Laboratory (PEARL) (http://www.cfcas.org/PEARL/) is being shut down, is scrambling to have their terrabytes of data deposited in the Canadian Polar Data (http://www.api-ipy.gc.ca/pg_IPYAPI_052-eng.html) which was funded by the International Polar Year. The scientists are doing this almost gratis. But nothing was in place for Canadian Policy Research Network (CPRN) (http://www.cprn.org/index.cfm). Fortunately in that Case because of two of Canada's top public policy schools are at Carleton U, the Library chose to archive their site, otherwise, that material would have been lost. Where is the schoolnet data? CAP data? there is not gc.ca website archive. Trusted Digital Repository There is also nothing on a trusted digital repository nor is there any mention about research data, (i.e. http://rds-sdr.cisti-icist.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/eng/news/data_summit_report.html), I like that citizens were listened to via an online consultation, but I also have deep respect for Canada's expert opinions on issues, and the"national approach to managing Canada's research data" was such a document and Canadian research librarians, researchers and big science data manages did contribute to this, yet there is no mention of it. Gov. Information Library but what of Depository Service Program: In terms of the Gov Information Library, that is exciting but the Depository Service Program (DSP0 (http://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/programs/aboutDsp.html) already did that, and federal institutions by law were to deposit in these, and also ensure that libraries across Canada disseminated government information. Unfortunately, IT departments did not consider web publications to be publications and therefore did not deposit web documents there. For example, my favorite government program GeoConnections only had 2-3 documents in the Archives and no documents in the DSP and only a couple in government libraries, and now that its side has been changed due to accessibility, many documents were removed and who knows where they went, but I can tell you their material did not go into their own Library as I found more at Carleton U than the NRCan library! And that is one of the good ones. I hope this works, but with CLF and accessiblity, which documents will be in that library? Record Keeping It is great to see record keeping back on the table, however, that has been a TBS directive in place (http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?section=text&id=16552) since 2009 while Library and Archives Canada has been providing material on how to do that for much longer. Also, what kind of enterprise system? Will Canadians be made aware of the system being put in places? How robust is it? Is it proprietary? Will Canadians be providing this new technology or will it be a US company? Who was awarded the Contract? Administrative Data or PSI I hope that "resource allocation and performance management information" means administrative data or public sector information and not just evaluation data. For example, how many students receive canada student loans by province, would be administrative data, or the HIFIS data I mentioned earlier, or pipeline plans survey plans, and I wonder if that is what is meant here? What about government procurement? Why would a new term be used when internationally these other terms are recognized and widely used. Consultations: It would be great if consultations also happened with experts and that those consultations were open, the Research Data Canada example provided above is one of them. There is also merit in round tables on issues which is something the National Science Foundation in the US does really well. I personally am not that excited about a twitter summit, but I do appreciate the opportunity for meaningful dialogue. Also, along with working with the public, what if we have concerns about the pipeline or the cancellation of the census, will the government actually listen? That too is a form of consultation and government & public deliberation, which I have not yet heard much about. For example, we will have open data, but what if we make discoveries with those open data, how do we deliberate with the evidence. These are my quick observations, Harvey and I will go through the material sent to us during the teleconferences and will use that information to elaborate further. One of Harvey's points is really important, where are the provinces, territories and municipalities. It is true that this is a federal initiative, however, the OGP is about Canada, and only federal Canada and the federal plan is being discussed and there have been no consultations with provinces, and as we know, this is where land registries and administrative data exist. Cheers t
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Harvey Low <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Hello everyone. > > FYI - here's the link to the Action Plan. http://open.gc.ca/open-ouvert/information-eng.asp > > As a Civil Society Representative at the Open Government Partnership Meeting in Brazil next week, Tracey and I will be providing feedback from the calls we have had with some of you and the feedback from this group. > > Harvey Low > Civil Society Rep > Canadian Council on Social Development > National Community Data Program > http://www.ccsd.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=53&Itemid=228&lang=en > > -- Tracey P. Lauriault 613-234-2805 |
Re: Comments: Federal Open Government Action Plan...
|
|
The action plan is quite short - the main content is at this page: http://open.gc.ca/open-ouvert/ap-pa04-eng.asp
It is interesting that they are going to run a pilot to accept electronic payment for ATI requests, as the requirement to pay by cheque has been a major barrier to anyone outside Canada filing requests. It should be noted that Canada is one of few countries that charges to file a request - most are either free or only charge processing fees. On 2012-04-12, at 11:18 AM, Tracey P. Lauriault wrote: I just read this, and here are my quick reflections: |
Re: Comments: Federal Open Government Action Plan...
|
|
Aaron Wherry of Maclean's is asking for responses to the action plan https://twitter.com/#!/aaronwherry/status/190473414530707456
His blog is widely read: http://www2.macleans.ca/category/blog-central/canada-blog/beyond-the-commons/ I would recommend sending him any thoughts/reactions to the announcement. He responds well to substance. According to this page (http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/08/17/roll-call/) you can reach him at [hidden email], or just tweet him. James On 2012-04-12, at 3:48 PM, James McKinney wrote: > The action plan is quite short - the main content is at this page: http://open.gc.ca/open-ouvert/ap-pa04-eng.asp > > It is interesting that they are going to run a pilot to accept electronic payment for ATI requests, as the requirement to pay by cheque has been a major barrier to anyone outside Canada filing requests. It should be noted that Canada is one of few countries that charges to file a request - most are either free or only charge processing fees. > > On 2012-04-12, at 11:18 AM, Tracey P. Lauriault wrote: > >> I just read this, and here are my quick reflections: >> >> Progress is being made, but with teeny tiny steps. >> >> Transparency: >> There is nothing in there about transparency, which mean pipeline information will still be inaccessible, administrative data are only alluded to, when programs are cancelled (e.g. Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences (CFCAS), CPRN) where do those data go so I am not sure if access to HIFIS will ever be available. Regulation can still be changed behind closed doors, cabinet memos remain secret, and so on. Organizations like Centre for Law and Democracy and Democracy Watch have been watching this closely and they can better than I speak to that issue. >> >> Archiving Data: >> Nothing is said about the preservation of data and information related to cancelled programs, or scientific and research data in general. There will be additional access to some archived material once clearance has been removed, but nothing in the plan about the archiving and preservation of data nor digitization. For example the Polar Environment Atmospheric Research Laboratory (PEARL) (http://www.cfcas.org/PEARL/) is being shut down, is scrambling to have their terrabytes of data deposited in the Canadian Polar Data (http://www.api-ipy.gc.ca/pg_IPYAPI_052-eng.html) which was funded by the International Polar Year. The scientists are doing this almost gratis. But nothing was in place for Canadian Policy Research Network (CPRN) (http://www.cprn.org/index.cfm). Fortunately in that Case because of two of Canada's top public policy schools are at Carleton U, the Library chose to archive their site, otherwise, that material would have been lost. Where is the schoolnet data? CAP data? there is not gc.ca website archive. >> >> Trusted Digital Repository >> There is also nothing on a trusted digital repository nor is there any mention about research data, (i.e. http://rds-sdr.cisti-icist.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/eng/news/data_summit_report.html), I like that citizens were listened to via an online consultation, but I also have deep respect for Canada's expert opinions on issues, and the"national approach to managing Canada's research data" was such a document and Canadian research librarians, researchers and big science data manages did contribute to this, yet there is no mention of it. >> >> Gov. Information Library but what of Depository Service Program: >> In terms of the Gov Information Library, that is exciting but the Depository Service Program (DSP0 (http://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/programs/aboutDsp.html) already did that, and federal institutions by law were to deposit in these, and also ensure that libraries across Canada disseminated government information. Unfortunately, IT departments did not consider web publications to be publications and therefore did not deposit web documents there. For example, my favorite government program GeoConnections only had 2-3 documents in the Archives and no documents in the DSP and only a couple in government libraries, and now that its side has been changed due to accessibility, many documents were removed and who knows where they went, but I can tell you their material did not go into their own Library as I found more at Carleton U than the NRCan library! And that is one of the good ones. I hope this works, but with CLF and accessiblity, which documents will be in that library? >> >> Record Keeping >> It is great to see record keeping back on the table, however, that has been a TBS directive in place (http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?section=text&id=16552) since 2009 while Library and Archives Canada has been providing material on how to do that for much longer. Also, what kind of enterprise system? Will Canadians be made aware of the system being put in places? How robust is it? Is it proprietary? Will Canadians be providing this new technology or will it be a US company? Who was awarded the Contract? >> >> Administrative Data or PSI >> I hope that "resource allocation and performance management information" means administrative data or public sector information and not just evaluation data. For example, how many students receive canada student loans by province, would be administrative data, or the HIFIS data I mentioned earlier, or pipeline plans survey plans, and I wonder if that is what is meant here? What about government procurement? Why would a new term be used when internationally these other terms are recognized and widely used. >> >> Consultations: >> It would be great if consultations also happened with experts and that those consultations were open, the Research Data Canada example provided above is one of them. There is also merit in round tables on issues which is something the National Science Foundation in the US does really well. I personally am not that excited about a twitter summit, but I do appreciate the opportunity for meaningful dialogue. Also, along with working with the public, what if we have concerns about the pipeline or the cancellation of the census, will the government actually listen? That too is a form of consultation and government & public deliberation, which I have not yet heard much about. For example, we will have open data, but what if we make discoveries with those open data, how do we deliberate with the evidence. >> >> These are my quick observations, Harvey and I will go through the material sent to us during the teleconferences and will use that information to elaborate further. One of Harvey's points is really important, where are the provinces, territories and municipalities. It is true that this is a federal initiative, however, the OGP is about Canada, and only federal Canada and the federal plan is being discussed and there have been no consultations with provinces, and as we know, this is where land registries and administrative data exist. >> >> Cheers >> t >> >> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Harvey Low <[hidden email]> wrote: >> > >> > Hello everyone. >> > >> > FYI - here's the link to the Action Plan. http://open.gc.ca/open-ouvert/information-eng.asp >> > >> > As a Civil Society Representative at the Open Government Partnership Meeting in Brazil next week, Tracey and I will be providing feedback from the calls we have had with some of you and the feedback from this group. >> > >> > Harvey Low >> > Civil Society Rep >> > Canadian Council on Social Development >> > National Community Data Program >> > http://www.ccsd.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=53&Itemid=228&lang=en >> > >> > >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Tracey P. Lauriault >> 613-234-2805 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> CivicAccess-discuss mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > CivicAccess-discuss mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss |
«
Return to CivicAccess
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |