On a bit of a stats kick, I decided to go browse over the tables at Statistics Canada, and ran into a surprising amount of data that you have to pay for. The data is not particularly expensive ($3 for the tables I was looking at) and I’m sure it’s full of juicy numbers… but I’m still annoyed. I understand they’re probably offsetting costs and whatever but isn’t that why I pay taxes? Isn’t the digital distribution of a couple of columns of numbers almost free?
I suppose their philosophy is that the people who use the stats should pay more than the people who’d have no use for it, but then aren’t we fostering a system where we’re only gathering the stats people have a vested interest in? The idea of a government-run public statistics bureau is that they collect, analyze and distribute data that benefits our understanding of the nation. I think putting up a monetary wall, however cheap, actually hinders a lot of the constituents who’d otherwise find the data interesting or useful.
That being said, there’s a lot of general summary tables available for free, so I can’t complain much. If I really needed to have detailed numbers on Softwood Toothpick Production it’d probably be worth the $3 to me.
As an aside, I hate the brutally inappropriate government “Common Look & Feel” design they’re trying to force on the site. But that’s a rant for another day.
2 responses so far ↓
1 M // Aug 5, 2009 at 7:07 pm
I really dislike cost recovery. It creates this client/business mentality, and then one day it isn’t just a supplement to the funds, but almost the entire funding itself.
You have no idea what a pain in the ass CL&F is!!! I for one, am anxiously awaiting your rant. Everything we want to post on the Ministry website has to be subjected to it! It’s insane. Every time there is a table or a chart, they have to meet strange parameters. It adds weeks to our deadlines, and has created a long wait for publication. It’s really frustrating because so much of our work is already subject to the whims of the gov.
2 Jen X // Aug 7, 2009 at 10:14 am
The cost involved in generating the stats for you is probably to balance out the time involved in compiling/generating/etc. said information. From the inside, I can tell you that what most people view as straightforward, simple requests often aren’t — either because the information isn’t stored that way, it isn’t compiled that way, or it isn’t readily available. That’s why there’s a token fee of $5 for ATIP requests — and that fee goes up if the information requested is significant. It’s also intended to cover off the cost of printing out the materials (not sure how Stats produces their information).
As far as CLF — as a comms person, as a member of the public, as a government person responsible for maintaining CLF and interpreting it sometimes for my colleagues — I actually like it. As a comms person, it’s such a giant pain in the ass to have to search through other government sites to find something simple and straightforward – like where their media releases are stored, a constant source of information I need. It also saves lazy web designers from using tables to present everything — which is a plus and a minus, speaking as someone who has been a lazy web person.
I’m not sure what these strange parameters your M commenter refers to, but I can probably explain them, or take a stab at them.
Granted, some departments’ implementation of CLF is a tad ass-backwards (Health Canada, I’m looking at you), but on the whole, I think it’s a good movement.
Leave a Comment