openmovement

You are currently browsing the archive for the openmovement category.

About the National Statistics Council of Canada

July 28, 2010 in canada, Census, federal government, government, openmovement, resources by Tracey | 4 comments

I am really excited to get information about Canada’s National Statistical Council.  Up and until recently all I knew about it was these 2 lines found in the deep lurkium about us section of the Statistics Canada Website.

Some time ago I called the StatCan general information line on numerous occasions, and asked officials about it.  All to no avail.  So I eventually submitted an ATIP request that StatCan has been working on for 2+ months. I still do not have the documents.  For some reason, the work of this Council is secret, as is its membership, as is what they are about.  I did however find some great papers that were submitted to it in the StatCan library.  The Library is a wonderful source of information as are their knowledgeable librarians.  Alas, they have come out of the closet as a result of this censuslessness.

If StatCan were more obvious with what it does and communicated its work more obviously, much of this whole censuslessness would have been much easier to counter.  For instance, other government agencies publish the legislation that govern them and/or mandates what they do.  StatCan does not have that information on their site.

In addition, all the justification about the questions they ask on the Census, how those questions came about, their public consultations are also available.  However one has to know the Agency really well to know where to find these, such as the names of the reports, and which sections of that report and so on.

Eccetera

Here is information about the National Statistical Council of Canada:

Council Role — Overview

The National Statistics Council advises the Chief Statistician of Canada on the full range of Statistics Canada’s activities, particularly on overall priorities. The government appoints Council members and its approximately 40 volunteer members represent sophisticated and diverse data users, researchers and those whose experience enables them to advise on priorities for the country’s statistical system.

A longer description, taken from the United Nation’s description of the Canadian statistical system, is included as another attachment (National Statistics Background.doc and here).

For those who may want to discuss statistical advisory bodies like the Statistics Council and, more generally, the relation between statistical agencies and governments, this is the subject of current research by Prof. Cosmo Howard in the Political Science department of the University of Victoria. howardc at uvic dot ca and has agreed to serve as a media contact on that subject.

It should be noted that Professor Howard is not associated with the Council, nor does he speak for it. He is, however, an expert on bodies like the National Statistics Council.

Also, here is a document that speaks about the Council in more detail:

Establishment of the National Statistics Council

In the early 1980s Statistics Canada embarked on a conscious program of strengthening its active consultative mechanisms with key clients and broadly based representatives of the national interest. Among the major new initiatives were the establishment of a series of bilateral senior committees with key federal departments – both clients and sources of data derived from administrative records (this supplemented already existing strong consultative mechanisms with the provinces); and some 10-15 professional advisory committees were set up. The latter involved experts (typically from outside government) in such areas as demography, labour, national accounting, price measurement, service industries, etc.

In 1985, the government established, at the apex of the Agency’s consultative mechanisms, the National Statistics Council. Its formal mandate is very brief: it is to “advise the Chief Statistician in setting priorities and rationalizing Statistics Canada programs”. In line with other aspects of Canadian policy in relation to statistical activities, a careful balance was attempted between policy relevance and professional independence.

Appointment process and membership

Members of the Council are appointed for a period of three years but subject to renewal. There are about 40 members. While there are no rules for representation, the following practice has generally been adhered to:

1. All members serve in their individual capacities – there are no formal representational appointments;
2. Most members are interested and prestigious analysts of some aspect of Canadian life, but few are professional statisticians;
3. Some members from Statistics Canada’s various professional advisory committees serve on the Council. This ensures the availability of a wide range of subject matter knowledge within the Council, as well as linkage with the Agency’s other advisory bodies;
4. A senior member from the Statistical Society of Canada sometimes serves;
5. At least one senior journalist on social or economic affairs is a member;
6. Membership is selected in such a fashion as to ensure appropriate knowledge of the different provinces and territories of Canada ;
7. No federal official is a member of the Council. This enhances the de facto independence of Council to “speak up” should it be necessary;
8. The Chief Statistician is an ex officio member;
9. An Assistant Chief Statistician serves as secretary.

A large proportion of the initial members, were appointed by the Minister from a list of persons recommended by the Chief Statistician. Subsequent appointments have been proposed to the Minister by the Chief Statistician following discussions with the Chairman of the Council.

As a result of these measures, the Council is a very knowledgeable, influential and broadly representative group. Indeed, its influence derives from the individual prestige of its members.

Agenda and Modus Operandi

The Council normally meets twice a year, each time for a day and a half. Regular agenda items are “Statements by Members” in which Council members may raise questions or concerns either for immediate response or subsequent discussion, and an in-depth report by the Chief Statistician on recent developments at Statistics Canada (including new substantive initiatives, forward planning, budgetary expectations). Other agenda items usually deal with major statistical or policy issues – such as: Census content, Environment statistics, Longitudinal data, Issues in social statistics, National accounts, Dissemination practices, Pricing policy, Privacy and record linkage, Contingency planning in the face of expected budget cuts, the Provincial component of the national statistical system, Significant statistical information gaps, etc.

Agenda items are selected from items raised by members and issues identified by Statistics Canada in discussions with the Chairman. From time to time a subgroup of the Council is formed to deal with particular issues (e.g. access to historical censuses) between Council meetings.

The Council generally provides feedback to the Chief Statistician through a discussion among its members. Consensus is usually (though not always) achieved.

Conclusion

There can be no doubt that members of the Council take their function seriously. The Chief Statistician regards their advice as being of very substantial benefit. In addition, through the prestige of its members and through precedent, Council has evolved into an additional and – should the need arise undoubtedly very influential – bulwark in the defence of the objectivity, integrity and long-term soundness of Canada’s national statistical system.

Government coercion in perspective: where does the long form of the census fit?

July 27, 2010 in Census, federal government, government, openmovement by Tracey | Permalink

Dr. Stanbury has been communicating with me over the past few weeks and has asked that I publish this Hill Times articled on Datalibre.ca.

Government coercion in perspective: where does the long form of the
census fit?: Filling out the long form census takes under 30 minutes, it does not ask about your sex life and no individual data have every been released. StatsCan officials know that their very existence depends on keeping individual data top secret.

By W.T. STANBURY <http://www.thehilltimes.ca/column/author/31> he is professor emeritus, University of British Columbia. Published July 26, 2010

The Hill Times

The core of the Harper government’s case for making the long form of the census voluntary (rather than mandatory for 20 per cent of households as it has been for 35 years) is that it is intrusive and coercive.

Here I examine the various types of coercion that are now or have been imposed by the federal government in an effort to put the mandatory long form into perspective.

The opponents of the government’s move to spend an additional $35-million to try to elicit one-third of households to volunteer to complete the long form (and I am one of them) need to deal directly and respectfully with the arguments for the change. Analysis can help here as in all policy issues.

The Government’s Arguments

The initial stated argument for the change in the census was as follows: “Our feeling was that the change was to make a reasonable limit on what most Canadians felt was an intrusion into their personal privacy in terms of answering the longer form,” Erik Waddell, spokesman for Industry Minister Tony Clement, said (Jennifer Ditchburn, Canadian Press, June 29, 2010).

Mr. Clement said the government’s decision (actually that of the PM personally, according to Jeffrey Simpson, The Globe and Mail, July 17, 2010) was “based on the fact that many Canadians had complained of the coercive and intrusive nature of the census, but Clement had not seen polling on the issue.”….According to Clement, “Every MP has had complaints like that so this year we decided to at least try another method that could be a sound method that would beat the issue of concern of degradation of data, and deal with the issue of coercion and too much intrusiveness,” (Ditchburn, Canadian Press, July 1,2010)

Mr. Clement said a week later that “Every four years, when the census is taken, Canadians flock to their local Member of Parliament to complain about being forced to answer ‘very intrusive questions,’” which cover everything from income to education level. “That’s the balance we’re trying to strike, between people who are concerned about that as opposed to the need for data,” (The Globe and Mail, July 7, 2010).

On July 13, 2010, Industry Canada issued a press release. “The government does not think it is appropriate to force Canadians to divulge detailed personal information under threat of prosecution.”

When told that the privacy commissioner had received less than a handful of complaints, Mr. Clement said that “If you’re concerned about government intrusion, you’re not likely to complain to another organ of government…. They would see it as compounding the issue if they complained,”(Steven Chase, The Globe and Mail, July 15, 2010).

Sen. Marjory LeBreton, who leads the Conservatives in the Senate, suggested nothing will be lost by moving to a voluntary long census. “There’s still going to be a long form,” she said in Ottawa. “The only difference is, this is voluntary. Canadians, I believe and we believe, will be very happy to fill in the long forms,” she said, (The Canadian Press, July 13,2010)

Maxime Bernier, a former minister of Industry, was quoted in a news story on July 18 saying that during the last census period in 2006, he received an average of 1,000 e-mail complaints a day while the survey was going on. (Heather Schofield, Canadian Press, July 18, 2010).

Treasury Board President Stockwell Day said “All we’re saying is, people shouldn’t be threatened with jail because they don’t want to tell some unknown bureaucrat how many bedrooms they’ve got in their house,” on Calgary radio station QR-77… “And you know, even prisoners of war only have to give their name, rank and serial number,” (quoted by Steven Chase, The Globe and Mail blog, July 23,2010).

Editorial Support

By July 24, only one newspaper editorial supported the government. (In contrast, The Globe and Mail has published five editorials opposing the change: July 12, 19, 21, 22, 24).

Here is the core of its argument of the Toronto Sun on July 20,2010: “Call us crazy, but we believe the less the government knows about our personal lives the better. Big Brother is so … well, so 1984.It’s also more reminiscent of the constraints of communism than the freedoms of democracy….We hope this bully-boy tactic—either fill it out or face prosecution—is forever down for the count…. If it [the state ] has no business in the bedroom, then it has absolutely no business knowing how many bedrooms are in our homes.”

For a wonderful deconstruction of the Sun’s editorial, see Robert Silver, Globe and Mail blog, July 20,2010

Legitimate Exercise of Coercion

In a democratic society, sovereignty rests with the people. They delegate to their elected representatives authority to make laws which are ultimately backed by coercion. Thus the people arrange to be coerced by the government they establish. The power to impose coercion is—properly—tightly circumscribed. First, both Houses of Parliament must approve the laws under which coercion can be exercised. Second, the civil right of individuals are protected in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, part of the 1982 Constitution. Third, in almost every case, coercion on the form of monetary penalties or imprisonment cannot be imposed until after a trial has been held before a court or court-like tribunal. In all cases, there are rights of appeal, usually in two stages. Fourth, in some cases, individuals can appeal to one or more specialized bodies which have a measure of independence to investigate allegations of improper action by a government department or agency.

Coercion in Perspective

Coercion by the state is always a matter of degree. Clearly the most coercive act by the state is the imposition of the death penalty after due process of law. (Canada eliminated the death penalty for murder on July 14,1976. The last execution was in 1962). Next might come the imposition of the draft for military service in time of war. (Note that the death rate varies greatly by branch of service and particular types of assignment.) Somewhat less coercive is imprisonment for a long tern (up to life) after due process of law. (But we know that the actual sentence may be far less than the one handed down at trial.) Then would come a large fine—by large I mean large relative to the person’s ability to pay—and which also ensures that there are no ill-gotten gains from the crime. And then we come to fines for parking tickets (at the local level) and civil monetary penalties (for example, the Ethics Commissioner can impose a penalty of up to $500 for failure to file the required information.)

Taxes are by definition compulsory levies, and in Canada the overall tax burden is high because we have a welfare state. People understand that if they fail to pay the taxes levied by government, they could be fined ,hit with penalties exceeding the unpaid taxes, and—just possibly—be put in jail.

Long Form as Coercion

So how coercive was the mandatory long form of the Census? Every five years a random sample of 20 per cent of households were selected to complete the 53-question long form. This task–done only by an adult for the entire household–usually took less than 30 minutes. The questions may probe what some define as intimate matters, but the responses are not just confidential—they are treated as top secret by Statistics Canada. The agency takes great pride in keeping individual files secret, and in preventing inferences about small groups of individuals from published information.

How many people would be required to respond to the long form? About 1.1 million persons out of a total population of some 34.2 million as of July 1,2010. Here is the calculation. The average size of households is 2.5 persons, based on the 2006 census—so that means 13.7 million households. A 20 per cent random sample equals 2.74 million households. But only one adult in each household answers the questions—so divide by 2.5 to get a total of 1.1 million..

Despite the possible use of coercion, StatsCan relies—as do the income tax authorities—on voluntary compliance. They are prepared to make several call backs and/or telephone calls to urge compliance. Officials know that the maximum fine that can be imposed if a case is taken to court is $500. In theory ,a judge could jail a person for non-compliance, but there is no record of this ever being done. Section 31 of the Statistics Act provides for these penalties: “fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or to both.”

Prosecution can take years to reach a resolution. For example, Saskatoon-based activist Sandra Finley continues to fight the federal government in court over her refusal to return the 2006 census, (Ditchburn, Canadian Press, July 1, 2010).

In summary terms, the average Canadian adult will be chosen to fill out the long form once in a lifetime. The task will take under 30 minutes. Some of the questions may be puzzling, but they do not ask about anyone’s sex life. (That is left to Oprah and some other talk show hosts.) Finally, no individual’s data have ever been released. StatsCan officials know that their very existence depends on keeping individual data top secret.

Conclusion

When compared to the full range of coercion exercised by the federal government, that related to the long form of the census is the most mild. And there are very good reasons why it is mandatory. A random sample (in this case 20 per cent of households, not individuals) is the only scientific way (short of a 100 per cent count) of assuring that the data will not be biased in ways that are impossible to determine precisely.

W.T. Stanbury is professor emeritus, University of British Columbia.

news@hilltimes.com

The Hill Times

Canadian Census Compromise and New Chief

July 26, 2010 in canada, Census, federal government, government, openmovement, policy, politics by Tracey | 3 comments

Here is a proposal that is on the table by the National Statistics Council of Canada:

The issue of the long form census has to be settled first. The outlines for a compromise solution were contained in a statement, issued yesterday, by the National Statistics Council. I fully endorse their ideas: :

  1. Restore the compulsory long form or make the equivalent National Household Survey compulsory;
  2. Repeal from the Statistics Act any mention of jail as a penalty for not completing the long form or an equivalent compulsory National Household Survey.
  3. For all future censuses introduce a series of explicit tests that would determine whether a proposed census question passes an appropriate balance between critical need for information and privacy.
  4. Instruct Statistics Canada to run tests, in time for recommendations about the 2016 census, concerning the possible impacts of a voluntary long form census.

a separate source is recommending the following regarding the appointment of a New Chief Statistician:

A new Chief Statistician has to be found with impeccable credentials and high credibility. Furthermore, the process should be, and should be seen as being totally transparent.[ It is] suggest[ed] the appointment of a search committee of eminent persons (such as the chair of the National Statistics Council, President of the Statistical Society of Canada, Chief Justice of Canada, President of the Royal Society of Canada, retired clerks of the Privy Council or others of similar credibility and profile). The committee would submit to the government a short list from which the Chief Statistician would be selected. It is utterly essential that in the midst of this crisis the next Chief Statistician be a person who is, and who was selected by a process, that is visibly above partisan fray.

Weekend Census Media Roundup

July 26, 2010 in canada, Census, federal government, government, openmovement, policy, politics by Tracey | Permalink

NJN Network: Scrapped mandatory census cuts even deeper for disability advocacy group – Disability advocacy groups have major challenge ahead following cuts to the census and StatsCan’s disability survey

The Hill Times: Census uproar impacts ‘broader narrative’ of PM’s relationship with public service. Some say the issue will remind voters of a string of incidents in which the government has interfered with the federal public service.

Cyberpresse: Quand Stephen Harper aimait le recensement

Hill Times: Shine a light census blow-back

Globe and Mail: Scrapped mandatory census cuts even deeper for disability advocacy group Disability advocacy groups have major challenge ahead following cuts to the census and StatsCan’s disability survey

Globe and Mail: Why the census matters just about everywhere

Globe and Mail: Flaherty defends Tory census plan Finance Minister says Canadians will fill in voluntary census for ‘the good of the country’

Yahoo News: Political firestorm rages over Canadian census

Worthwhile Canadian Initiative: Why a Mandatory Census is Necessary

Toronto Star: Why the long census matters

105 Creations: Why we need to keep the long-form Census.

Le Devoir: Recensement – Ottawa doit faire marche arrière
Seul le quart des Canadiens jugent que le gouvernement Harper doit maintenir sa décision de retirer le formulaire long obligatoire

Globe and Mail: Harper’s census push months in the making Scrapping the mandatory long form stems from libertarian convictions, insiders say

Right of Centre: My Census Email to Peter Braid (CPC – KW)

CBC: Clement to face MPs on census

Vancouver Sun: Six things you should know about the Tories’ census change

Macleans: What time do you leave for work? Ottawa’s never actually asked

Why the Census Matters UIA and Jewish Federation. This is a great summary of the Issues. I am not in favour of the make due approach that is discussed, however, the speaker does qualify the statement with the fact that analysis can be done but not longitudinally. Meaning the new baseline for social analysis in Canada would become 2011 – we start over at ground zero.

Census: Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology

July 23, 2010 in Census, federal government, government, openmovement by Tracey | 2 comments

HOUSE OF COMMONS
3rd Session, 40th Parliament

A study of the long-form portion of the Census

Televised 9-10AM.

NOTICE OF MEETING

Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology

AMENDED

Meeting No. 29
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Room 253-D, Centre Block
(613-996-4916)

Appearing

Tony Clement, P.C., M.P., Minister of Industry

Witnesses

Panel I

Department of Industry

Richard Dicerni, Deputy Minister

10:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

Panel II

As individuals

Ivan P. Fellegi
Former employee of Statistics Canada
Ancien employé de Statistique Canada

Munir Sheikh
Former employee of Statistics Canada
Ancien employé de Statistique Canada

12:30 p.m. to 1:30 p.m.

Panel III

Université du Québec à Chicoutimi

Martin Simard, Research Professor
Department of Human Resources
Départment des sciences humaines

York University

David Tanny, Associate Professor
Department of Mathematics and Statistics
Départment de mathématiques et statistiques

2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

Panel IV

  • Carleton University Library Data Centre
  • Ernie Boyko, Adjunct Data Librarian
  • 3:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

Panel V

  • National Citizens’ Coalition
  • Peter Coleman, President and Chief Executive Officer
  • Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami
  • Elisapee Sheutiapik, Board Member
  • Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
  • To be determined

Unprecendented – Chief Statistician Town Hall Meeting

July 20, 2010 in canada, canadian projects, Census, federal government, government, openmovement by Tracey | 2 comments

Graphic By http://www.socialsignal.com/
Wednesday, July 21, 2010 in the Simon A. Goldberg Conference Room from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m (Ottawa time).

The text below, sent by the Chief Statistician to all employees of Statistics Canada is a very interesting development.

La version française suit.

2011 Census: Meeting the challenge

On June 26, 2010, the questionnaire for the 2011 Census was published in the Canada Gazette as required by the Statistics Act. The census will consist of the same eight questions that appeared on the 2006 Census short-form questionnaire. The information previously collected by the mandatory long-form questionnaire will now be collected as part of the new voluntary National Household Survey.

Since the announcement, this new format has received widespread coverage in the news media.

I am aware that this situation has generated questions. Given this, I have decided to hold a town hall on Wednesday, July 21, 2010 in the Simon A. Goldberg Conference Room from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m (Ottawa time).

In order to ensure I address those issues of most concern, I ask that you submit your questions via e-mail to Chief Statistician/Statisticien en chef before 12 p.m. on Tuesday, July 20 (Ottawa time).

Because of the limited capacity of the conference room, the meeting will be broadcast live on the ICN.   An e-mail with the link to the broadcast will be sent to all employees before the meeting. Simultaneous translation and sign interpretation will be provided.

———————————

Recensement de 2011 : relever le défi

Le 26 juin 2010, le questionnaire du Recensement de 2011 a été publié dans la Gazette du Canada, conformément à la Loi sur la statistique. Le recensement sera constitué des mêmes huit questions qui ont figuré dans le questionnaire abrégé du Recensement de 2006. Les données antérieurement recueillies au moyen du questionnaire détaillé seront recueillies sur une base volontaire dans le cadre de la nouvelle Enquête nationale auprès des ménages.

Depuis son annonce, ce nouveau format a reçu une couverture médiatique très importante.

Je suis conscient que la situation a soulevé des questions. Par conséquent, j’ai décidé de tenir une séance de discussion ouverte le mercredi 21 juillet 2010 au Centre de conférences Simon-A.-Goldberg de 14 h à 15 h (heure d’Ottawa).

Afin de bien cerner les enjeux les plus préoccupants, je vous demande de me faire parvenir vos questions à l’adresse Statisticien en chef/Chief Statistician d’ici le mardi 20 juillet à 12 h (heure d’Ottawa).

En raison de la capacité d’accueil limitée de la salle, la réunion sera diffusée sur intranet en temps réel.  Un courriel contenant le lien vers le RCI sera envoyé à tous les employés avant l’événement. La traduction simultanée et l’interprétation gestuelle seront offertes.

Open Data – Vote & Submit

June 19, 2010 in academia, Access, campaigns, canada, copyright, federal government, government, Open Data, openmovement, science, Uncategorized by Tracey | Permalink

Access to public data is one of the most popular VOTE topics in the submissions on the Digital Economy Consultation site. Here are the VOTING submissions that ask for open data, open access and open government.

1. Open Access to Canada’s Public Sector Information and Data is looking for some votes.

2. Improved access to publicly-funded data associated with research data Require open access to results of research funded by the Canadian taxpayer

3. Open Access to Canadian research

4. National Archives Content Online

5. Créer une licence « Creative Commons » du Canada

6. Protect and enhance digital freedoms for education

There has also been some writing about the consultation:

Michael Geist: Opening Up Canada’s Digital Economy Strategy

David Eaves: Canada’s Digital Economy Strategy: Two quick actions you can take

Take a few minutes to login and vote! If you can, provide a comment about how access to data has improved or will improve your work.

Please vote – Open Access to Canada’s Public Sector Information and Data

June 10, 2010 in Access, campaigns, canada, copyright, federal government, government, infrastructure, open access, Open Data, openmovement, R&D, science by Tracey | Permalink

Please vote – Open Access to Canada’s Public Sector Information and Data. This is part of the Industry Canada Digital Economy Consultation.

Please take some time to vote and distribute within your networks and institutions! It just takes a few seconds.

We are at a tipping point on this issue in Canada and your few seconds of your time could open up our data resources. You will also see a complimentary Research Data and improved access to publicly-funded data submissions that could also use some votes while you are at it!

Below is the text. If you have ideas that can be added for a formal submission, I would be really glad to hear from you!

Create a data.gc.ca for Canada’s public sector information (PSI) and data in parallel with the excellent NRCan GeoConnections model (e.g. GeoGratis, GeoBase, Discovery Portal).

These PSI & data should be shared at no cost with citizens, be in accessible and open formats, searchable with standard metadata, wrapped in public domain or unrestricted user licenses, delivered within an an open architecture infrastructure based on open standards, specifications and be interoperable. It should be governed with open government principles whereby data & PSI are shared first and arguments to restrict are made only for legitimate privacy and security reasons which should also be disclosed. It should have a permanent home and include both the right combination of multi-departmental (e.g. CIC, INAC, HRSDC, NRC, NRCan, etc.) inputs, trans-disciplinary human resources (e.g. Librarians, archivists, scientists) along with IT specialists & engineers. It should be built in consultation with Canadians to ensure it is designed with user needs and useability in mind. (This is how the GeoConnections program built the Canadian Geospatial Data Infrastructure).

The Government of Canada produces administrative data for the purpose of program delivery (e.g. Canada Student Loan, location where new Canadians land, the number and location of homeless shelters, etc.), and it produces data for the purpose of governing for example: the data collected by Statistics Canada (e.g. Census & Surveys, National Accounts); Environment Canada (e.g. air & water quality, location of brown sites); Canada Centre for Remote Sensing (e.g. satellite and radar imagery); Industry Canada (e.g. corporate registry); Canada Revenue Agency (e.g. Charities dbase); National Research Council (e.g. Scientific data); SSHRC (e.g., social science research data) and more. These data have already been paid for by Canadians via taxation, and the cost of selling these data back to citizens on a cost recovery basis is marginal or more expensive (e.g. Cost of government to government procurement, management of licences, royalties, government accounting and etc.) relative to the benefits & reduced overhead of delivering these data at no cost. Furthermore, Canadians often pay multiple times for the same data, since each level of government also purchases the same data, federal departments purchase these data from each other and there are examples where municipalities purchase the same data multiple times from Statistics Canada. This is not only a waste of taxpayer money it goes against the principle of create once and use many times and of avoiding the duplication of effort.

Data & PSI are non rivalrous goods where sharing and open access to these does not impede other from doing so. Open access stimulates research and IT sectors who will have the resources they need for the creation of new data R&D products (e.g. Applications) and services (e.g., web mapping), evidence based decision making (e.g. Population health), and informing public policy on a number of key Canadian issues (e.g. Homelessness, housing, education). In addition, evidence from Canadian City Open Data Initiatives (e.g., Vancouver, Edmonton, Toronto, and Ottawa) have demonstrated that the cost and time to find and access data & PSI within government have been greatly reduced since finding these are easier and negotiating access becomes a non issue, which in turn brings savings to citizens and greater efficiencies within these institutions. Finally, participatory and deliberative democracies include the active engagement and inputs from citizens, civil society organizations, the private sector, and NGOs along with their government. Making these data available increases the collective knowledge base of Canadians and stimulates public engagement, improves efficiencies, and fuels innovation.

These are already our (citizen’s) data & PSI, why not share share them with us and enable citizens and the government to work together to stimulate Canada’s economy, create innovative industries and formulate evidence based public policy.

Open Data Hackfest – Ottawa April 24, 2010

April 19, 2010 in canadian projects, government, open access, Open Data, openmovement, Uncategorized by Tracey | Permalink

Date: Saturday, April 24th, 2010.

Time: 13:00 to 17:00.

Cost: FREE

Location: Ottawa City Hall ( in the Champlain Room )

110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario
K1P 1J1 (gmap)

What to Bring: Gadgets! Bring you laptops, mobile phones, phasers set to stun, etc…

About: www.opendataottawa.ca & Video.
Twitter: @opendataottawa.

What others have been saying:
Apartment 613 -Open Data Ottawa Hackfest wants to make you appy

Registration: just so the organizers have a better idea of who’s going to show up.

Tags:

Open Dinosaur Project

September 9, 2009 in datasets, openmovement, projects, R&D, resources, science by Hugh | Permalink

This, I love:

The Open Dinosaur Project was founded to involve scientists and the public alike in developing a comprehensive database of dinosaur limb bone measurements, to investigate questions of dinosaur function and evolution. We have three major goals:1) do good science; 2) do this science in the most open way possible; and 3) allow anyone who is interested to participate. And by anyone, we mean anyone! We do not care about your education, geographic location, age, or previous background with paleontology. The only requirement for joining us is that you share the goals of our project and are willing to help out in the efforts.

Want to sign up? Email project head Andy Farke (andrew.farke@gmail.com), and welcome aboard!

[via datalibre]

« Older entries § Newer entries »