(You may need to click twice or if you wish Go Directly to the clip on Google Video)
This- is Mississauga.
Readers will remember this interview question from the World Mayor 2005 website.
It's good at this point to revisit Mayor McCallion's assurances regarding how she prevents corruption and cronyism in Mississauga.
Let's take "accountable" "transparent" "open to public scrutiny" "access to information" for a test drive.
Check this out, kiddies.
Example --from the mississauga.ca website, The Corporation trumpets its Environics Survey with "Mississauga Residents Highly Satisfied with City Services Environics Research Reports"
The press release stated:
"As part of Environics' FOCUS ONTARIO survey conducted in the Greater Toronto Area in late 2006, Mississauga residents were surveyed on a number of questions related to municipal government. "
The Corporation's Environics survey, conducted "in late 2006", was actually conducted between "October 24 and November 15, 2006". When you know that the Municipal Election was at its peak those weeks, and that Election Day was November 13th, this FOCUS ONTARIO survey had a bit of an air to it.
Since few people are better qualified than me to handle such matters, naturally, I dropped down a Freedom of Information request for their FOCUS ONTARIO survey --the "full report". (We all do what we're good at)
Here's what I got back. "The City of Mississauga is denying access".... a phrase I've gotten used to from a city where the Mayor trumpets a "transparent governance system".
OK. So there's this contractual agreement with the "third party" (Environics) and apparently it's "Environics" who's denying access to the requested "full report". Simple solution. I filled in another FOI, this time requesting only THE QUESTIONS. Surely, "an accountable and transparent government" whose "procedures (are) open to public scrutiny" that claims to "provide the public with access to information" will at the very least, provide the public access to THE QUESTIONS of the FOCUS ONTARIO survey.
So I plopped down another five bucks and this:
Here's what I got back. The We-"provide the public with access to information"-Mississauga is allowing the public access:
to just FOUR questions!
See?
Here they are --count 'em. Four:
How insulting to the public is that?
I mean when you consider that mississauga.ca offers these FOUR results from the FOCUS ONTARIO survey:
"The key FOCUS ONTARIO findings indicate:
87 per cent of Mississauga residents are very or somewhat satisfied with their municipal government (see Question 2)
95 per cent of Mississauga residents approve of Mayor McCallion's performance as mayor (see Question 4)
30 per cent of Mississauga residents cite transportation issues, namely traffic and transit, as the leading local problem. (see Question 1)
More than half of those surveyed (54 per cent) would like to see increased spending on public transit, even if it means an increase in taxes. (see Question 3)
That means that the FOUR QUESTIONS returned through Freedom of Information are the exact FOUR already up on the mississauga website! Five bucks and a one-month wait through FOI and I get nothing more than what I already knew!
How insulting and CONTEMPTUOUS of the public is that?!
I'd just learned Rule 1 about Freedom of Information. "No matter how far down to the bottom of the bucket you descend, there's still more bucket-bottom." Observe...
Yeah yeah, sure. "The Third Party has not consented". Yeah, yeah, "The City of Mississauga has a contract with Environics...that this information cannot be released to any third party or the public" ya da ya da ya da.
Conclusion? It's in the interest of The Corporation or any corporation, institution, entity, evil empire etc. to enter into contractual agreements with other corporations, institutions, entities, evil empires etc. who then agree (as part of the contractual arrangement) to deny access to information, results, surveys, questions, bids, advice etc to the public.
After all, Accountability might rear its butt-ugly head.
Of course, I could go back to Toronto today to the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario and drop down $25.00 for another appeal. But I won't --after all, it's important to choose your battles wisely.
Besides, I think I made my point. This is the run-around stonewalling Dead-End I got for something as innocuous as a phone-survey of 400 people. Just imagine the lid they'd slam-steelyshut on something BIG.
The Environics-FOI-request was just a fiddley-bit probe that I flung out to test the Mayor's claims of "transparency". A "Testing. FOOwah-FOOwah.. Testing. One. Two. Three" kind of thing --to satisfy a curiosity.
Now imagine if it was you who really needed information --imagine if it were vital. Imagine that your quality of life depended on it. Your job. Your reputation. Now Imagine if you were a New Canadian taking this "Freedom of Information" Kafka-esque Mississauga Merry-Go-Round for a spin...
Yeah. Imagine.
It's worth cuttin' and pastin' this again:
OK. In the absence of Information shared by The Corporation/Environics regarding the FOCUS ONTARIO questions, let's fill the vacuum and use our imaginations surrounding this secrecy.
Let's take a flight of fancy and simply MAKE UP what those Environics telephone questions might be! And so:
"FOCUS ONTARIO --FABRICATED QUESTIONS" will be the subject for tomorrow's Blog. Feel free to send in your Fabricated Questions.
Signed,
The (Question 1: Will you be voting for Your Dedicated Incumbent on November 13th?) Mississauga Muse
P.S. About that picture of a diver holding up a (can I write "turd" in the Mississauga News?). Anyway, yes, that's really me underwater holding a ....umm fecal pellet --one of rather impressive size. For two summers we researched sea turtle diet. The best and easiest way is to analyze their droppings. I wasn't kidding when I wrote that "few people are better qualified than me to handle" matters with "a bit of an air" to them.
"We must employ every possible tactic to dissuade those who try to silence us with fear"
---The Mississauga News Editorial (2007-03-24)
Click here for John Stewart's Blog
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------