Transcript: A Year of Planning Quayside | Oct 25, 2018

Steve sits in the studio. He's slim, clean-shaven, in his fifties, with short curly brown hair. He's wearing a gray suit, white shirt, and spotted blue tie.

A caption on screen reads "A year of planning Quayside. @spaikin, @theagenda."

Steve says FROM THE START,
PRIVACY WAS A KEY CONCERN FOR
MANY ASSESSING THE HIGH-TECH
NEIGHBOURHOOD SIDEWALK LABS AND
WATERFRONT TORONTO PROPOSED FOR
A LARGE CHUNK OF THE CITY'S
UNDERUSED PORT LANDS.
A YEAR ON FROM THE FORMAL
ANNOUNCEMENT, AND AFTER SOME
HIGH-PROFILE RESIGNATIONS, IT
REMAINS THORNY.
HERE FOR A LOOK AT WHERE THINGS
STAND TODAY:
ANN CAVOUKIAN, DISTINGUISHED
EXPERT-IN-RESIDENCE, LEADING THE
PRIVACY BY DESIGN CENTRE OF
EXCELLENCE AT RYERSON UNIVERSITY...

Ann is in her fifties, with shoulder-length reddish brown hair. She's wearing glasses, a black blazer and a golden necklace.

Steve continues MARK WILSON, FORMER CHAIR OF THE
BOARD OF WATERFRONT TORONTO AND
STILL A PART OF ITS DIGITAL
STRATEGY ADVISORY PANEL...

Mark is in his sixties, clean-shaven, with short blond hair. He's wearing glasses, a gray suit and a spotted white shirt.

Steve continues DAVID FRASER, PRIVACY LAWYER AND
PARTNER AT McINNES COOPER, AND
AN ADVISOR TO SIDEWALK LABS...

David is in his mid fifties, clean-shaven, with short gray hair. He's wearing a gray suit, pale yellow shirt, and blue plaid tie.

Steve continues BIANCA WYLIE, SENIOR FELLOW AT
CIGI, THAT'S THE CENTRE FOR
INTERNATIONAL GOVERNANCE
INNOVATION AND CO-FOUNDER OF
TECH RESET CANADA...

Bianca is in her late thirties, with short brown hair. She's wearing a black jacket and a dark shirt.

Steve continues AND SAADIA MUZAFFAR, FOUNDER OF
TECHGIRLS CANADA.

Saadia is in her thirties, with short curly dark hair dyed red. She's wearing a black blazer over a blue shirt.

Steve continues WE ARE DELIGHTED TO WELCOME SOME
OF YOU BACK AND SOME OF YOU HERE
FOR THE FIRST TIME, AND WE'LL
LET THE AUDIENCE AT HOME GUESS
WHO'S WHO.
LET'S START, MARK, WITH YOU.
GIVE US JUST THE LATEST.
WHERE'S THIS AT RIGHT NOW?

The caption changes to "Mark Wilson. Former Chair of the Board for Waterfront Toronto."

Mark says WELL, WE ARE
IN THE MIDDLE OF A PLANNING
PROCESS TO RECEIVE A PROPOSAL
FROM SIDEWALK LABS FOR THE
QUAYSIDE AREA ON THE WATERFRONT,
AND THEN BASED ON THAT PROPOSAL,
WE WILL DETERMINE WHETHER WE
WANT TO ACCEPT IT AND MOVE
FORWARD WITH THAT OR NOT.

Steve says DO YOU HAVE A SENSE
OF WHEN THAT PROPOSAL WILL BE
COMING?

Mark says I THINK WE'LL BE GETTING
DRAFTS PROBABLY EARLY NEXT YEAR.
THE SCHEDULE HAS ALREADY MOVED
ONCE.
I WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IF IT
MOVES AGAIN.
IT'S A VERY COMPLEX PROJECT,
TAKING A LOT OF BIG IDEAS AND
MAKING THEM OPERATIONAL IN A
PARTICULAR PLACE IN TORONTO IS A
LOT MORE COMPLICATED THAN I
THINK EITHER SIDEWALK OR
WATERFRONT HAD ANTICIPATED.

Steve says THIS IS SORT OF
UNPRECEDENTED, RIGHT, WHAT'S
BEING ATTEMPTED HERE?

Mark says THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THE
OBJECTIVE WAS WHEN WATERFRONT
TORONTO PUT OUT ITS RFP TO FIND
AN INNOVATION AND FUNDING
PARTNER, AND THAT WAS SIDEWALK'S
MISSION AND OBJECTIVE TO TRY AND
TRANSFORM CITIES AROUND THE
WORLD USING TORONTO AS THE FIRST
PLACE WHERE THEY WOULD CREATE
THAT DISTRICT, THAT
NEIGHBOURHOOD, WITH A WHOLE SET
OF INNOVATIONS, SOME OF WHICH
ARE DIGITAL, MANY OF WHICH ARE NOT.

Steve says I WANT TO GET
FEEDBACK FROM THE FORMER
INFORMATION AND PRIVACY
COMMISSIONER FOR THE PROVINCE OF
ONTARIO WHEN LAST YOU WERE HERE
DISCUSSING THIS VERY TOPIC, YOU
WERE KIND OF BULLISH ABOUT IT.
AND THEN I COULDN'T HAPPEN BUT
HELP NOTICE THAT YOU'VE RESIGNED
FROM YOUR INVOLVEMENT IN ALL
THIS.
WHAT HAPPENED?

The caption changes to "Ann Cavoukian. Privacy by Design Centre of Excellence."
Then, it changes again to "Privacy problems."

Ann says I DIDN'T DO
IT LIGHTLY.
I WANTED TO DRAW ATTENTION TO
THE FACT THAT WE HAD TO MAKE
SURE THAT ALL THE PERSONAL DATA
THAT WAS BEING COLLECTED
AUTOMATICALLY BY THE SENSORS AND
OTHER TECHNOLOGIES WERE
DEIDENTIFIED AT SOURCE, AND NONE
OF IT AT SOURCE.

Steve says DEIDENTIFYED
MEANING...

Ann says MEANING NO PERSONAL
IDENTIFIERS.
YOU WOULDN'T KNOW IT IS ANN
CAVOUKIAN OR THIS IS MY CAR OR
ANYTHING.
AND THE REASON THAT WAS CRITICAL
IS UNLIKE MOST USES OF WHAT I
CALL OPERATIONAL DATA, WHERE THE
INDIVIDUAL, THE DATA SUBJECT,
CAN EXERCISE SOME CONTROL OVER
THE USE, THE OPERATION OF THAT
DATA.
THEY CAN CONSENT TO IT.
THEY CAN REVOKE CONSENT.
THEY CAN CHOOSE NOT TO CONSENT.
THEY HAVE SOME SENSE OF CONTROL.
WITH THE DATA HERE, YOU HAVE NO
CONTROL.
IT'S ALL BEING COLLECTED
AUTOMATICALLY, WITH THE EMERGING
TECHNOLOGY, SENSORS ALL PICKING
UP DATA.

Steve says BUT WHAT THAT HAD...
BECAUSE INITIALLY OBVIOUSLY YOU
THOUGHT THAT PROBLEM COULD BE SOLVED.
WHAT CHANGED?

Ann says IT CAN STILL BE SOLVED.
I HAD A COMMITMENT FROM SIDEWALK
LABS.
THEY WANT TO USE MY FRAMEWORK TO
EMBED THE NEEDED PROTECTIONS
INTO THE DESIGN OF ALL OF THEIR
OPERATIONS, AND THEY'VE BEEN
VERY GOOD SO FAR, EXCEPT AT THE
LAST MEETING THAT I ATTENDED ON
THURSDAY, THEY CREATED THIS NEW
GROUP CALLED THE CIVIC DATA
TRUST, WHICH SOUNDS GREAT, TO
ADDRESS THE GOVERNANCE ISSUES
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS.
THERE'S PRIVACY ISSUES AND
GOVERNANCE ISSUES.
THEY'RE BOTH VERY IMPORTANT.
I ADDRESSED PRIVACY.
THEY SAID IT WOULD CONSIST OF
WATERFRONT TORONTO, OURSELVES,
OTHER BODIES, COMPANIES AND
OTHERS, AND WE'LL ENCOURAGE THEM
TO DEIDENTIFY THE DATA AT
SOURCE, BUT WE HAVE NO CONTROL
OVER WHAT THEY DO.

Steve says SO ENCOURAGEMENT
WASN'T ENOUGH?

Ann says OH, MY GOD.
THIS MUST HAPPEN AS THE DEFAULT.

Steve says DAVID, YOUR RESPONSE
TO WHAT YOU'VE JUST HEARD?

The caption changes to "David Fraser. McInnes Cooper."

David says I'M ACTUALLY
OPTIMISTIC THAT THAT'S WHERE
WE'RE GOING TO END UP.
THE CIVIC DATA TRUST MODEL IS
ONE WHERE ALL THE INFORMATION
THAT'S COLLECTED IN THE AREA,
WHICH COULD INCLUDE PERSONAL
INFORMATION, BUT IT COULD ALSO
BE INFORMATION ABOUT POLLEN
COUNTS AND SUNSHINE HOURS AND
THINGS LIKE THAT, GOES THROUGH A
PROCESS IN WHICH THE COMMUNITY,
AND NOT SIDEWALK LABS, THE
COMMUNITY ACTUALLY DETERMINES,
ANALYSES, GOES THROUGH ALMOST AN
ETHICAL REVIEW, WHAT'S CALLED A
RESPONSIBLE DATA IMPACT
ASSESSMENT, IN ORDER TO MAKE
DECISIONS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT
THIS INFORMATION CAN BE
COLLECTED IN THE FIRST PLACE.
SO THAT FRAMEWORK WAS PROPOSED.
THE RULES FOR THAT FRAMEWORK
WERE NOT PROPOSED.
AND SO ON ONE HAND, IF SIDEWALK
HAD CONTROL OVER IT, THEN
SIDEWALK COULD DICTATE THOSE
TERMS.
BUT WHAT THEY'VE PUT FORWARD IS,
HERE'S A PROPOSAL.
IT WILL NOW BE OUT OF OUR HANDS.
IT'S GOING TO BE INTO THE
COMMUNITY'S HANDS AND
STAKEHOLDER'S HANDS AND THEY GET
TO ESTABLISH THOSE RULES.
I'M OPTIMISTIC, AND CERTAINLY
PRIVACY BY DESIGN HAS BEEN
THOUGHT OF THROUGHOUT THIS WHOLE
PROCESS AND THAT'S NOT ENDING AS
OF LAST THURSDAY.
THAT'S GOING TO CONTINUE.
BUT IT WILL BE THAT BODY THAT
MAKES THOSE DECISIONS, THAT SETS
THE SAME RULES FOR ANYBODY WHO
OPERATES IN THE QUAYSIDE
COLLECTING INFORMATION AGAIN
ABOUT NOT PERSONAL INFORMATION
OR INFORMATION THAT RELATES TO
HUMANS IN THAT SPACE.

The caption changes to "Mark Wilson. Former Chair of the Board for Waterfront Toronto."

Mark says I JUST WANT TO ADD TO THAT,
IF I MIGHT, STEVE?
FIRST OF ALL, I DON'T THINK
SIDEWALK ACTUALLY PROPOSED THAT
IT AND WATERFRONT TORONTO BE ON
THE DATA TRUST.
IT LEFT THAT QUESTION OPEN AND
IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION
AS TO WHO IS ACTUALLY GOING TO
BE ON THIS TRUST, ASSUMING WE GO
FORWARD WITH IT.
WHO IS IT GOING TO BE
ACCOUNTABLE TO AND WHAT'S THE
ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES IT'S
GOING TO TAKE.
WHO ACTUALLY WAS GOING TO BE ON
THAT WAS NOT PART OF THEIR
PROPOSAL.
THE OTHER THING THAT I THINK IS
VERY IMPORTANT IS WATERFRONT
TORONTO AND SIDEWALK HAVE
ALREADY SIGNED AN AGREEMENT
WHICH SPECIFICALLY INCLUDES
PRIVACY BY DESIGN, WHICH
SPECIFICALLY INCLUDES LOOKING AT
DEIDENTIFICATION TECHNIQUES,
EDGE COMPUTING TO IN FACT
ACCOMPLISH EXACTLY WHAT ANN IS
LOOKING FOR.
I THINK THERE IS NO QUESTION
THERE'S A COMMON GOAL HERE TO DO
THE DEIDENTIFICATION.
THE ACTUAL NUANCE IS MORE
TECHNICAL.
IN ORDER TO ACCOMPLISH THAT COST
EFFECTIVELY, INSTEAD OF USING A
BIG COMPUTER TO DEIDENTIFY, WE
ACTUALLY NEED A CHIP THAT RUNS
THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
SOFTWARE THAT CAN DO THE
DEIDENTIFICATION AT SOURCE, AT
THE CAMERA, THROW AWAY THE
IMAGE, TRANSMIT ANONYMOUS DATA.

Steve says WE DO HAVE THIS TECHNOLOGY?

Mark says NO.

Steve says WE HAVE TO DEVELOP IT.

Mark says SO THAT'S REALLY THE ISSUE
AND THAT'S WHY PEOPLE ARE
RELUCTANT TO SORT OF GUARANTEE
THAT THIS WILL HAPPEN BECAUSE
THE TECHNOLOGY HAS BEEN
ANNOUNCED.
IT'S NOT COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE.

Steve says THAT'S A WORK IN PROGRESS.

The caption changes to "Ann Cavoukian. Ryerson University."

Ann says THE DEVIL IS
ALWAYS IN THE DETAIL.
THAT'S WHY I WANT WATERFRONT
TORONTO TO SAY, IN TERMS THAT
CANNOT BE DEBATED, LAY DOWN THE
LAW.
EVERYTHING MUST BE DEIDENTIFIED
AT SOURCE.
AND MY FRUSTRATION IN PART IS
(a) THEY HAVEN'T SAID THAT AND
(b) I HAVE REFERRED SIDEWALK
LABS TO ONE OF THE BEST, THE
STRONGEST WORLD RENOWNED
EXPERT...

Steve says WHO IS HE WITH?

Ann says A PROFESSOR AT THE UNIVERSITY
OF OTTAWA, HE'S KNOWN FOR THE
STRENGTH OF HIS DEIDENTIFICATION
PROTOCOLS COMBINED WITH A
DEIDENTIFICATION FRAMEWORK.
WHERE HE MINIMIZES THE RISK TO
LESS THAT .05 percent.
THAT'S LESS THAN THE LIKELIHOOD
OF BEING HIT BY LIGHTNING.

Steve says WE HAVEN'T HEARD
FROM A COUPLE OF OTHER PEOPLE
YET.
YOUR DEPARTURE WAS NOT THE ONLY
ONE THAT WAS NOTICED.
SAADIA, YOU HAVE STEPPED DOWN
FROM THE DIGITAL STRATEGY
ADVISORY PANEL; IS THAT RIGHT?

Saadia says I DID.

Steve says HOW COME?

The caption changes to "Saadia Muzaffar. Techgirls Canada."

Saadia says I WAS NOT GETTING THE SENSE
THAT WATERFRONT TORONTO, WITH
ITS MANDATES OF RESPONSIBILITIES
TO BE STEWARDS FOR THE RESIDENTS
OF TORONTO WAS TAKING THE PUBLIC
TRUST ISSUES AS SERIOUSLY AS
THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN, AND THERE
WAS NO PUBLIC RECORD OF THE
CONCERNS THAT WERE BEING RAISED
BY MYSELF AND MY FELLOW
PANELISTS.
SO THE OPTICS OF SOMETHING LIKE
THAT IS THAT WHATEVER IS
HAPPENING... AND A LOT HAPPENED
IN THE FIVE MONTHS THAT I WAS ON
THE PANEL BUT THAT IT HAD OUR
BLESSING AND THAT WAS NOT THE
CASE.

Steve says THERE ARE ALWAYS TWO
APPROACHES TO TAKE WHEN
SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAPPENS,
RIGHT, WHEN IT COMES TO CRUNCH
TIME.
EITHER YOU RESIGN, AND THAT
MAKES A VERY POWERFUL STATEMENT,
OR YOU STICK AROUND AND SEE IF
BY STAYING YOU CAN CHANGE THINGS
TO YOUR SATISFACTION.
YOU OBVIOUSLY CHOSE THE FORMER
RATHER THAN THE LATTER.
WHY NOT STICK AROUND?

Saadia says I TRIED THE FIRST ONE.

Steve says YOU DID?
YOU TRIED STICKING AROUND?

Saadia says I DID.
AND I THINK WHEN I JOINED THE
PANEL, WHEN THE PANEL WAS
BROUGHT TOGETHER, SOME OF THE
ISSUES WERE REALLY WELL-KNOWN IN
TERMS OF WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO
HELP WATERFRONT TORONTO
UNDERSTAND AND OUR ADVICE WAS
SUPPOSED TO HELP MAKE THE
DECISIONS AROUND WHETHER THIS
WAS A GOOD PROPOSAL FOR THE CITY
OF TORONTO AND THE RESIDENTS OF
TORONTO.
SO FIVE MONTHS OF TRYING TO DO
THAT AND NOT HAVING VISIBILITY
INTO THE CONCERNS THAT WERE
BEING RAISED IS A VERY BIG DEAL
TO ME.
SO I DIDN'T WANT TO LEAVE BUT
SOMETIMES YOU DON'T HAVE A
CHOICE.

Steve says BIANCA, I SHOULD GET
YOUR... LET ME GET AN UPDATE ON
WHERE YOU'RE AT ON THIS.
THE LAST TIME YOU WERE HERE YOU
WERE CLEARLY THE MOST SKEPTICAL
PERSON AROUND ALL OF THE ISSUES
ON PRIVACY.
ANYTHING THAT CHANGED IN YOUR
VIEWS OVER THAT PERIOD OF TIME?

The caption changes to "Bianca Wylie. Centre for International Governance Innovation."

Bianca says NO.
IT WASN'T JUST PRIVACY IT'S THE
ENTIRE STRUCTURE OF THIS PROJECT
AND DATA AND ALL KINDS OF
DIFFERENT TOPICS.
WHERE I WAS A YEAR AGO WAS
WONDERING HOW WE WERE SUPPOSED
TO HAVE ANY KIND OF A DEMOCRATIC
PROCESS WHEN RESIDENTS AND
PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY'S
UNDERSTANDING AROUND DATA
LITERACY, ISSUES OF INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY, THE ECONOMICS OF DATA,
WHAT A DATA MONOPOLY LOOKS LIKE,
WHAT POWER ASYMMETRIES ARE IS
VERY LOW, MYSELF INCLUDED, TO A
DEGREE.
THIS IS HOW COMPLICATED THESE
ISSUES ARE.
A YEAR LATER, THIS COMPANY CAME
TO TOWN WITH 50 MILLION U.S.
DOLLARS, 12 MILLION OF THEM WERE
ALLOCATED TO DOING PUBLIC
ENGAGEMENT.
THERE HAS BEEN NO PUBLIC
EDUCATION ON THESE REALLY
IMPORTANT TOPICS, WHICH IS SUPER
PROBLEMATIC, JUST AS A START.
AND SECOND, THE ENGAGEMENT
ITSELF, IN TERMS OF CONSULTING
PEOPLE ON ISSUES EVEN BEYOND
THINGS RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY AND
DATA AND ANYTHING ELSE, HAS BEEN
THEATRICAL.
THESE HAVE NOT BEEN GROUNDED IN
ANY SORT OF PROPER DEMOCRATIC
PROCESS.
AND IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO
REMEMBER, SOME OF THE ISSUES
THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ARE
BORNE OF THE FACT THAT THIS
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL WAS PUT OUT
BY WATERFRONT TORONTO.
WATERFRONT TORONTO IS NOT THE
GOVERNMENT.
SO WE HAVE A PUBLIC CORPORATION
THAT HAS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
MANDATE TAKING WHAT
RESPONSIBILITY IT HAD AND
PUSHING IT OVER TO A VENDOR TO
DEFINE HOW THESE THINGS SHOULD
BE WORKING.
IF THAT ISN'T A STRUCTURE FOR
DISASTER, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS.

Steve says I KNOW EVERYBODY
ELSE WANTS IN ON THIS.
LET ME READ... I THINK IN THE
INTEREST OF FAIRNESS... THE CEO
OF SIDEWALK LABS IS A FORMER
DEPUTY MAYOR OF NEW YORK CITY
AND HE HAD THIS TO SAY TO ITS
ADVISORY COUNCIL OCTOBER 17TH...

A quote appears on screen, under the title "What's the big idea?" The quote reads "The central idea is that our role is to be an essential catalyst... showing how to solve real urban problems not just here in Toronto but around the world.
This is really what Waterfront Toronto had in mind at the get-go: that a catalyzing force was necessary to break a pattern of increasingly unaffordable, unsustainable, less livable, less connected communities."
Quoted from Dan Doctoroff, Medium. October 17, 2018.

Steve says I MEAN, THAT'S
CLEARLY WHERE HIS FOCUS IS.
ARE YOU CONCERNED... WHAT IS
YOUR CONCERN ABOUT THE NATURE OF
THAT FOCUS?

The caption changes to "Bianca Wylie. Tech Reset Canada."
Then, it changes again to "A grand plan?"

Bianca says DOES THAT SOUND LIKE A
CORPORATE INTEREST PROBLEM, OR
DOES THAT SOUND LIKE SOMETHING
THAT A GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE
MANAGING?
BECAUSE WHEN YOU READ THAT TO
ME, I'M THINKING THOSE ARE ALL
GOVERNMENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES,
NOT THINGS THAT A FOR-PROFIT
CORPORATION WOULD BE HERE TO
DICTATE THE TERMS OF.
THAT'S MY INITIAL REACTION TO
THAT.

Steve says MARK WILSON, DO YOU
WANT TO COME BACK ON THAT?

Mark says SURE.
I MEAN, THE NOTION THAT SOMEONE
IS DICTATING THE TERMS IS SIMPLY
INCORRECT.
THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO PREPARE A
PROPOSAL, AND WE HAVE THE RIGHT
TO EXAMINE THAT, TO CRITIQUE IT.
THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO REVISE
IT.
AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE
HAVE A RIGHT TO REJECT IT, AND
THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO WALK AWAY
AS WELL, BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE
THE DEAL.
SO THOSE ARE... YOU KNOW, THAT'S
THE PROCESS WE'RE CURRENTLY
ENGAGED IN.

Steve says BIANCA, COME BACK ON
THAT.

Bianca says IT'S REALLY
IMPORTANT THAT WE START TO SPEAK
MORE HONESTLY ABOUT THIS
PROPOSAL AND OUR, MAYBE WE'LL
REJECT AND MAYBE WE'LL ACCEPT
IT.
WE'VE HAD FOR MORE THAN A YEAR,
GOVERNMENT STAFF FROM THE
BUREAUCRACY WORKING FROM ALL
LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT TO GET THIS
PLAN INTO SOME KIND OF SHAPE.

Steve says SO YOU THINK IT'S A
DONE DEAL?

Bianca says THEY'RE WORKING TOWARD MAKING
IT HAPPEN, WHICH... WHAT IS THE
LIKELIHOOD THAT THIS AMOUNT OF
GOVERNMENT ENERGY AND TIME AND
POLITICAL CAPITAL IS GOING TO GO
THIS FAR DOWN THE ROAD AND THEN
STAFF AT THE CITY ARE GOING TO
TURN AROUND AND SAY, "OUR
RECOMMENDATION IS TO REJECT THIS
PROPOSAL"?
IS THAT REALLY A PLAUSIBLE
OUTCOME HERE?

The caption changes to "Connect with us: Twitter: @theagenda; Facebook, agendaconnect@tvo.org, Instagram."

Mark says WELL, FIRST OF
ALL, THIS NOTION THAT THERE'S
WORK GOING ON BEHIND DOORS AND
THERE'S SOME SECRET PLAN THAT
HASN'T BEEN REVEALED IS SIMPLY
INCORRECT.
I THINK THAT THE PROCESS, AS I
SAID EARLIER, HAS TAKEN
INCREDIBLY LONGER THAN ANYONE
HAD ANTICIPATED.
SO ORIGINALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT
THE FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT THAT WAS
SIGNED, THEY THOUGHT IT WOULD
HAVE WHAT'S CALLED A PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, WHICH WAS
THE NEXT PHASE, WOULD BE DONE IN
60 DAYS.
THAT TOOK SEVEN MONTHS, MORE
THAN SEVEN MONTHS.
BECAUSE OF THE COMPLEXITY OF
THIS THING.
THE NUMBER OF INNOVATIONS AND
IDEAS THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO
BRING TO BEAR ON THIS I THINK
BOGGLES THE MIND.
AND THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH A
SELECTION PROCESS TO BRING THAT
FORWARD.
SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, THEY
REVISED THE SCHEDULE ONCE.
I THINK THEY MAY REVISE THE
SCHEDULE AGAIN.
AND I THINK IT'S ENTIRELY
PLAUSIBLE THAT THOSE PLANS WILL
BE REJECTED.
I THINK... WHAT I HOPE WILL
HAPPEN IS THAT WE'LL GO THROUGH
AN ITERATIVE PROCESS.
PEOPLE CRITIQUE A NUMBER OF
ASPECTS.
I THINK THOSE PLANS WILL EVOLVE.
WE'LL SEE IF A DATA TRUST IS THE
RIGHT SOLUTION.
THIS THEN THE PLANS WILL
ITERATIVE AND CHANGE AND WE WILL
COME TO A DECISION.

Steve says GO AHEAD.

The caption changes to "David Fraser. Advisor to Sidewalk Labs."

David says CERTAINLY ON THE TOPIC, AND I
CAN ONLY SPEAK TO MY EXPERIENCE
AND WHAT I'VE SEEN THROUGH THIS
PROJECT.
I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WOULD HAVE
ANTICIPATED, CERTAINLY THE
CRITICS WHEN THIS PROJECT WAS
INITIALLY LAUNCHED, WOULD HAVE
THOUGHT THAT WE WOULD HAVE ENDED
UP IN A SITUATION WHERE SIDEWALK
SAYS WE DON'T WANT TO CONTROL
THE DATA.
THEY'VE BEEN OPEN AND RECEPTIVE.
THIS IS THE RESULT OF
SIGNIFICANT CONSULTATION.
YOU DON'T HAVE... YOU CAN'T
IMAGINE THAT THEY WOULD HAVE
COME IN HERE AND HIRED ANN, WHO
IS SO INCREDIBLY OUTSPOKEN AND
SO INCREDIBLY THOUGHTFUL ABOUT
THESE SORTS OF THINGS AND EXPECT
THEY WOULD WHITEWASH THINGS.
THIS HAS BEEN SIGNIFICANT
LISTENING TAKING THINGS INTO
ACCOUNT.
YEAH, THERE ARE MULTIPLE
STAKEHOLDERS.
ULTIMATELY THE DECISIONS RELATED
TO ALL THIS HAVE TO BE MADE BY
THE COMMUNITY AND ROOTED IN THE
COMMUNITY...

Steve says THE RISK IS WHEN YOU
ASK AN ANN CAVOUKIAN TO SIGN
ONTO TO A PROJECT AND SHE DOES
AND LEAVES, IT DOES TEND TO GET
PEOPLE'S ATTENTION.

David says THERE'S NO DOUBT.
I CAN'T SPEAK FOR ANN BUT I'M
HOPEFUL SHE WILL REMAIN ENGAGED.
WHEN THE RUBBER HITS THE ROAD IS
IN THE NEXT STEPS.

Steve says SAADIA?

The caption changes to "Saadia Muzaffar, @ThisTechGirl."

Saadia says IT IS
INCREDIBLY FRUSTRATING FOR ME AS
SOMEBODY WHO CALLS TORONTO HOME
AND WORKS IN TECHNOLOGY, FIRST
TO KEEP PRETENDING THAT ALPHABET
AND GOOGLE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND
WHAT THEY WERE DOING, ESPECIALLY
WHEN IT COMES TO DATA, WHEN THEY
CAME TO TORONTO.
SO THIS WHOLE THING ABOUT WE ARE
LISTENING AND RESPONDING, THIS
IS NOT THEIR FIRST RODEO, AND
IT'S NOT THE FIRST SMART CITY
THAT HAS BEEN BUILT IN THE
WORLD.
SO FOR US TO KEEP TALKING TO THE
FACT THAT... IT IS INCREDIBLY
COMPLEX.
BUT I THINK THERE ARE CERTAIN
THINGS THAT HAVE TO BE (UNCLEAR)
AND THAT WAS PART OF THE REASON
I WAS FRUSTRATED.
WE SHOULD KNOW THESE THINGS.
THERE ARE THINGS COMING INTO THE
MODEL, EVEN THE PROPOSAL, THAT
THE PUBLIC SHOULD KNOW AND WE
SHOULD HAVE HAD THE PROCESS
BEFORE THE VENDOR WAS SELECTED,
WE SHOULD HAVE HAD WIDE PUBLIC
CONSULTATIONS.
WE PICKED WHO WE WANTED TO BUILD
THE THING FIRST AND THEN WE'RE
LIKE, OH, WHAT ARE THE
REQUIREMENTS?
WHAT ARE THEY ACTUALLY LOOKING
TO BUILD?
SO IT'S BACKWARDS.

The caption changes to "Watch us anytime: tvo.org, Twitter: @theagenda, Facebook Live."

Steve says ANN?

The caption changes to "Ann Cavoukian, @AnnCavoukian."

Ann says WHAT I WANT
TO MAKE CLEAR IS WHAT ATTRACTED
ME TO WORK ON THIS IS WE WANTED
TO DIFFERENTIATE THE SMART CITY,
TORONTO, FROM THE OTHERS IN THE
WORLD, DUBAI, OTHER PLACES.
I'M ON THE INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL
FOR SMART CITIES.
AND THEY ARE SMART CITIES OF
SURVEILLANCE.
THEY TRACK EVERYTHING.
YOU HAVE NO PRIVACY.
IT IS A SURVEILLANCE EXERCISE.
WHAT DISTINGUISHED... WHAT I WAS
HOPING WOULD DISTINGUISH
TORONTO, WE WOULD BE A SMART
CITY OF PRIVACY.
WE WOULD ADDRESS PRIVACY RIGHT
UP FRONT, WHICH IS WHY THEY
CONTACTED ME, EMBED PRIVACY BY
DESIGN, MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE'S
PRIVACY IS TOTALLY PRESERVED,
AND THEN ALLOW THE DATA TO BE
USED IN WHATEVER WAYS AND DATA
GOVERNANCE ISSUES WILL HAVE TO
BE ADDRESSED.
BUT I WANTED TO LOCK DOWN THE
PRIVACY ISSUE.
AND THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN DO THAT
IS BY DEIDENTIFYING ALL
INFORMATION AT SOURCE.
AND I HAD A COMMITMENT ABOUT
THAT FROM SIDEWALK LABS AT THE
BEGINNING.
SO NOW I'M LOOKING TO WATERFRONT
TORONTO TO PUT THAT COMMITMENT
IN WRITING SO THAT THEY LAY DOWN
THE LAW.
ANYONE WHO WORKS WITH THEM MUST
DO THIS UP FRONT SO THAT WE CAN
HAVE A SMART CITY OF PRIVACY,
NOT OF SURVEILLANCE.

Steve says CAN THE ORGANIZATION
YOU USED TO CHAIR GIVE HER THAT
UNDERTAKING?

Mark says I THINK
THEY'VE ALREADY COMMITTED TO
PRIVACY BY DESIGN IN THE
AGREEMENT.
SO I THINK THAT COMMITMENT HAS
BEEN MADE.
I THINK THEY'VE ALREADY
COMMITTED IN WRITING TO THAT
AGREEMENT TO MAXIMIZING THE
DEIDENTIFICATION AND USE OF EDGE
TECHNOLOGIES, AS I ALREADY SAID.
IT'S WRITTEN DOWN IN A CONTRACT.

Ann says IT'S WALKING
THE TALK, MARK.
THAT'S THE CRITICAL THING.

Mark says SO THAT HAS
BEEN DONE, AND I THINK IT'S
PRETTY CLEAR THAT THAT'S A
SHARED GOAL.
SO I THINK THAT'S AN OPPORTUNITY
THAT WE'LL ABSOLUTELY MOVE
FORWARD WITH.
AND I PERSONALLY, AS A MEMBER OF
THE DIGITAL STRATEGY PANEL, WILL
CONTINUE TO ADVOCATE FOR THAT.
ANN, I HAVE NO QUESTION ABOUT
THAT.
I WANT TO TALK TO SAADIA, ONE OF
THE COMMENTS SHE MADE THAT WAS
AROUND... AND I APPRECIATE THE
POINT OF VIEW AROUND, SHOULD WE
HAVE HAD ALL THE REQUIREMENTS
SET IN A BIG PUBLIC CONSULTATION
BEFORE WE ISSUED AN RFP.
SO THAT'S ONE APPROACH TO IN
FACT PROCUREMENT.
AND I WOULD VIEW THAT AS A VERY
TRADITIONAL APPROACH TO
PROCUREMENT.
WHAT WATERFRONT TORONTO WANTED
TO DO HERE AND IN FACT WAS
PUSHED BY THE COMMUNITY MANY
TIMES TO DO WAS TO STEP UP ITS
GAME IN INNOVATION.
SO IT SAID, LOOK, I WANT TO
SEARCH THE WORLD TO FIND THE
BEST INNOVATION PARTNER, AND
THEN HAVING FOUND THAT PERSON,
WE'LL FIGURE OUT WHAT
INNOVATIONS WILL ACTUALLY APPLY,
AND THEREFORE WHAT RULES WE'LL
NEED TO GOVERN THOSE
INNOVATIONS.
TO DO THAT IN ADVANCE OF
ACTUALLY KNOWING WHAT THE
INNOVATIONS WOULD BE WOULDN'T BE
THE RIGHT PROCESS.

Saadia says MARK, I
DON'T WANT TO CONFLATE
DEMOCRATIC PROCESSES WITH
TRADITIONAL.
WE CAN'T JUST LEAVE BEHIND
THINGS THAT WE HAVE PUT IN PLACE
BECAUSE THEY ARE THOROUGH,
BECAUSE THEY PROVIDE A CHECK AND
BALANCE FOR POWER ASYMMETRIES.
THAT'S WHY THOSE PROCESSES
EXIST.
JUST BECAUSE THEY'VE EXISTED FOR
A WHILE DOES NOT MEAN WE CHUCK
THEM.
THAT'S NOT WHAT INNOVATION HERE.
WE BOTH WORK IN TECHNOLOGY.
WE KNOW THE SHINY ORB WE DO.
WE'RE GOING TO REVOLUTIONALIZE
THE WORLD.
SOME THINGS WORK FOR A REASON
AND I THINK THAT'S WHY PUBLIC
TRUST HAS BEEN SHAKY FROM THE
GET-GO FOR THIS PROJECT BECAUSE
THERE WAS NO INVESTMENT ON BOTH
WATERFRONT AND SIDEWALK'S PART
AND SIDEWALK IS A PROFIT
GENERATING COMPANY.
THEY'RE DOING WHAT THEY'RE
SUPPOSED TO DO.
I'M LOOKING TO WATERFRONT AS A
STEWARD FOR THE RESIDENTS OF
TORONTO.
THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUBLIC
EDUCATION.
AND WE SHOULD HAVE HAD MORE
MEANINGFUL CONVERSATIONS AROUND
WHAT IT IS THAT THE RESIDENTS
WANTED TO BUILD.
DO WE EVEN WANT THE THINGS THAT
ARE BEING PROPOSED?
IS WE DON'T KNOW BECAUSE NOBODY
ASKED THE PUBLIC.

Steve says LET ME GET BIANCA IN
HERE AND I'M GOING TO COVER
ANOTHER ISSUE.

The caption changes to "Bianca Wylie, @biancawylie."

Bianca says TWO POINTS
HERE, ONE TO BUILD OFF THE
ANTIDEMOCRATIC NATURE OF THIS
PROCESS, IS THAT WHOEVER SAID
ANYBODY WANTED ALL THIS DATA
COLLECTED?
THAT'S AN IMPORTANT STEP IN THIS
DISCUSSION.
WE... WE... I DIDN'T.
BUT SOME PARTIES HERE DECIDED
WE'D DECELERATE INTO WHAT WE
NEEDED TO DO TO ANONYMIZE IT,
WHICH IS ONE TRACK, ABSOLUTELY
PART OF THE CONVERSATION.
WE HAD A WHOLE OTHER HOST OF
ISSUES WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT AND
FRANKLY THERE'S A GLOBAL
CONVERSATION GOING ON RIGHT NOW,
TO WHAT DEGREE DO WE WANT OUR
BEHAVIOURS CAPTURED, EVEN IN
AGGREGATE.
TO WHAT EXTENT DO WE WANT THOSE
USED AND MONETIZED IN PRODUCTS?
HOW DO WE WANT TO MAKE GOOD USE
OF THESE THINGS IN THE PUBLIC
SERVICE VERSUS TURNING THEM INTO
A COMMERCIAL PRODUCT.

Steve says LET ME DO A FOLLOW-UP.
WOULD YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT MANY
MILLENNIALS ARE LESS FUSSED
ABOUT THOSE ISSUES...

Bianca says ABSOLUTELY NOT.
ABSOLUTELY NOT.
ABSOLUTELY NOT.
NO.
THEY'RE SAVVY BECAUSE THEY'RE
REALIZING HOW PEOPLE ARE
INCORRECTLY FRAMING THESE
ISSUES.
THE SECOND PART FOR ME IS
BUILDING ON THIS IDEA AROUND
SIDEWALK IS A FOR-PROFIT
BUSINESS, WATERFRONT IS THE ONE
WE LOOK TO.
TO A DEGREE, YES, LOOKING TO
WATERFRONT... AGAIN, WATERFRONT
IS NOT THE GOVERNMENT.
WE NEED TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT
THAT.
BUT THERE'S ALSO, AFTER A YEAR
IN BUSINESS, THE WAY SOMEONE
DOES BUSINESS WITH ME MATTERS.
SO I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY'RE
HERE DOING BUSINESS.
BUT HOW THEY ARE DOING BUSINESS
IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK AS A
CITY AND AS RESIDENTS WE NEED TO
BE PAYING ATTENTION TO.
BECAUSE WHEN YOU HAVE HAD A YEAR
TO GENUINELY TAKE TIME TO DO
EDUCATION AND ENGAGE PEOPLE AND
TELL THEM WHAT YOU'RE DOING...
AND, MARK, TO BE HONEST, THEY
HAVE NOT BEEN FORTH RIGHT IN
WHAT IS GOING ON.
PEOPLE STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT THE
PLAN FOR THIS SPACE IS.
THEY COULD BE COMING OUT AND
CO-DESIGNING, REALLY WORKING
WITH THE COMMUNITY.
THEY HAD A YEAR TO DO THAT.
THEY BURNED IT.
SO EVEN IF THEY ARE HERE DOING
THEIR BUSINESS AS A BUSINESS
WOULD DO, WE ARE STILL A CITY
AND AS THE RESIDENTS OF THIS
CITY, HOW THIS ALL WORKS MATTERS
IMMENSELY TO US AS OUR HOME AND
HOW THEY'RE DOING THIS BUSINESS
WITH WATERFRONT, WE SHOULD
REALLY... WE SHOULD REALLY STILL
BE THINKING ABOUT HOW THAT
PROCESS IS WORKING.

Steve says WOULD YOU FEEL MORE
COMFORTABLE ABOUT THIS WHOLE
THING IF CITY HALL WERE THE
ACTUAL BACKSTOP HERE INSTEAD OF
THIS QUASI PUBLIC ORGANIZATION,
WATERFRONT TORONTO?

Bianca says YES, AND... BUT LET'S BE REAL
ABOUT HOW THE CITY, THE
PROVINCE, AND THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT HAVEN'T BEEN SHOWING
UP IN PUBLIC.
THEY'RE WORKING ON THESE THINGS.
THEY'RE NOT COMING OUT AND
EXPLAINING TO PEOPLE WHAT THE
EXISTING PRIVACY LAWS ARE.
I WAS AT THE LAST WATERFRONT
TORONTO DIGITAL STRATEGY
ADVISORY PANEL MEETING, AND I
HEARD WATERFRONT TORONTO PROUDLY
EX-CLAIM AT ALL LEVELS OF
GOVERNMENT THAT THIS PROJECT
WILL NOT BE BREAKING THE LAW.
AND I THOUGHT, GOOD.
I'M GLAD THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT
TODAY A YEAR IN.
I MEAN, WHAT IS GOING ON HERE?
WHERE IS EVERYBODY AROUND THE
TABLE?
IT'S LIKE A FREE FOR ALL RIGHT
NOW.

Steve says DAVID FRASER, DO
YOU... OR PERHAPS... WHAT CAN
YOU POINT TO WHICH WOULD SUGGEST
THAT THERE IS AN APPETITE IN THE
CAPITAL CITY OF ONTARIO FOR
PEOPLE TO LIVE IN A COMMUNITY
THAT DOES INVOLVE... YOU USE THE
WORD YOU LIKE... SURVEILLANCE,
YOU KNOW, INFORMATION-GATHERING?
PICK THE LEAST OFFENSIVE THING.

David says CERTAINLY I
WOULDN'T CHARACTERIZE IT AS
SURVEILLANCE.

Steve says WHAT WOULD YOU CALL IT?

The caption changes to "David Fraser, @privacylawyer."

David says I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE
TALKING ABOUT INFORMATION
RELATED TO THE OPERATION...
CURRENTLY IN ANY MUNICIPALITY,
IN ANY ORGANIZATION OF PEOPLE,
THERE'S INFORMATION THAT'S
GENERATED.
THAT'S JUST AXIOMATIC.
THEN WHEN YOU WANT, FOR EXAMPLE,
UNDERSTANDING ABOUT THE TIMING
OF STREETLIGHTS, FOR EXAMPLE,
TRAFFIC CONTROL.
THAT IS USUALLY BASED ON
COUNTING CALLS AND THE VELOCITY
OF CARS AND ALL THAT.
THIS IS JUST INHERENT.
BUT I THINK WHAT'S THE IMPORTANT
THING TO FOCUS ON, AT LEAST THE
KEY PART OF THIS DISCUSSION, IF
THE CITY OF TORONTO WERE DOING
THIS, THEY WOULD BE SUBJECT TO
THE MUNICIPAL FREEDOM OF
INFORMATION AND PROTECTION OF
PRIVACY ACT, THEY WOULD HAVE NO
REQUIREMENT NECESSARILY TO DO A
PRIVACY IMPACT ASSESSMENT OR
REVIEW OF THESE THINGS.
SMART CITIES ARE BEING BUILT ALL
OVER THE PLACE WITHOUT PEOPLE
BEING AWARE OF ALL THE
INFORMATION BEING GENERATED,
MUCH PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE,
MUCH PUT IN DATABASES.
THIS WILL BECOME A MODEL THAT
WILL BE ADOPTED IN THE REST OF
CANADA BUT IT'S ALSO EXPORTABLE
AROUND THE WORLD.
BUT TO BIANCA'S POINT ABOUT
ASKING, SHOULD WE BE COLLECTING
THIS INFORMATION AT ALL, THAT'S
AN IMPORTANT QUESTION.
THAT'S PROBABLY THE FIRST
QUESTION THAT THE INDEPENDENT
DATA TRUST IS GOING TO BE
EXAMINING ON EVERY APPLICATION.
IT'S GOING TO BE A RESPONSIBLE
DATA IMPACT ASSESSMENT.
IS THIS JUSTIFIABLE?
IS THIS PROPORTIONATE?
IS THIS RELEVANT?
DOES THIS HELP THE COMMUNITY?
DOES THIS FURTHER THESE
OBJECTIVES?
THEY'LL BE IN A POSITION TO SAY
NO AND THAT'S A KEY PART OF THAT
SCREENING PROCESS.
I'VE BEEN PART OF SIMILAR
PROCESSES RELATED TO RESEARCH
ETHICS REVIEWS FOR PERSONAL
HEALTH INFORMATION AND YOU GO
THROUGH A PROCESS AND SCRUTINIZE
AND YOU REJECT PROJECTS OR
ACCEPT PROJECTS OR PUT
CONDITIONS ON PROJECTS.
I THINK IT'S A REALLY GOOD MODEL
WHERE THE FIRST QUESTION IS:
SHOULD THIS BE COLLECTED AT ALL?

Steve says ANN?

Ann says THE CIVIC
DATA TRUST HAS TO MAKE MANY
DECISIONS RELATED TO THE USE OF
DATA-GATHERING, ABSOLUTELY, BUT
NOT ON THE POINT OF PERSONALLY
IDENTIFIABLE DATA.
THAT HAS TO BE THE DEFAULT.
YOU DO NOT COLLECT ANY
PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE DATA.
FULL STOP.
THEN THERE ARE MANY, MANY
DECISIONS TO MAKE.
OF COURSE, GOVERNANCE-RELATED
ISSUES.
BUT WE HAVE TO ASSURE THE
PUBLIC, THE RESIDENTS OF THE
WATERFRONT, THAT YOUR PRIVACY IS
GOING TO BE PROTECTED.
IF WE WANT TO USE THIS AS A
MODEL FOR OTHER JURISDICTIONS,
IN NORTH AMERICA AND OTHERS, AS
A SMART CITY OF PRIVACY, YOU
HAVE TO START WITH THAT INITIAL
POINT.
THAT'S THE REASON I RESIGNED.
I WANTED TO ATTRACT ATTENTION TO
THIS ISSUE.
AND FORTUNATELY IT'S BEEN
WORKING.
SO I'M HOPING THAT WE WILL GET
THE ASSURANCE WE NEED, I THINK
FROM WATERFRONT TORONTO, THAT
YOU CANNOT COLLECT ANY PERSONAL
IDENTIFIABLE DATA.
AFTER THAT, BY ALL MEANS.
THERE ARE MANY QUESTIONS.

Steve says QUICK COMEBACK.

David says ONE ADDITIONAL POINT.
AT LEAST THE STATE OF THE LAW IN
CANADA IS, IF IT'S NOT PERSONAL
INFORMATION, YOU CAN COLLECT IT.
YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT.
THERE IS NO REGULATION ABOUT IT
WHATSOEVER.
AT LEAST THIS FRAMEWORK PUTS
CONTROLS AND SCRUTINY AROUND ALL
KINDS OF INFORMATION THAT'S
COLLECTED.

Ann says WITH DUE
RESPECT, AND I SPOKE TO THE
PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ON THIS, ON
THE ISSUE OF PRIVACY WE HAVE TO
RULE THAT OUT AT THE BEGINNING
IN TERMS OF ACCESS PERSONAL
IDENTIFIABLE DATA.
THE DEFAULT HAS TO BE PRIVACY.
YOU CANNOT COLLECT THAT.
BECAUSE PEOPLE CANNOT HAVE
CONTROL OR CONSENT OR LACK OF
CONSENT ASSOCIATED WITH THE
DATA.

Steve says LET'S GO OVER HERE.

Mark says I DON'T THINK
THERE'S ANY DEBATE ON THAT.
I THINK THE ONLY QUESTION THAT
WE'RE ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, THIS
FAR APART ON, IS WHETHER YOU CAN
DO IT AT SOURCE OR NOT IN A COST
EFFECTIVE WAY, GIVEN THE STATE
OF CURRENT TECHNOLOGY.
AND I THINK THERE'S BROAD
AGREEMENT AT WATERFRONT TORONTO
AND SIDEWALK TO THAT, AND
CERTAINLY I WOULD ADVOCATE THAT
DIGITAL STRATEGY ADVISORY PANEL.

Ann says IF YOU DON'T DO IT AT SOURCE,
IT WILL BE A TREASURE TROVE.

Mark says EVERYONE WANTS
TO DO IT AT SOURCE, ANN.

Ann says GREAT.

Mark says EVERYONE HAS
STATED THEY WANT TO DO IT AT
SOURCE.

Ann says LET'S PUT IT
IN WRITING.

Mark says CAN THE
TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT THAT AGAIN?
I THINK THE ANSWER IS NO.
AS A TECHNICIAN I WILL TELL YOU
THE ECONOMICS ARE NOT THERE.
CAN YOU DO IT AT AN EXTREME
COST?
ABSOLUTELY.
CAN YOU DO IT ECONOMICALLY AND
COST EFFECTIVELY AND AT SCALE? NO.

Steve says THIS SOUNDS LIKE AN
IMPASSE.

Ann says THEN YOU'RE
GOING TO BE GIVING IT AWAY...

Mark says SOMETHING
ELSE, STEVE.
YOU REDUCED THIS PROJECT TO
DIGITAL SURVEILLANCE AND I THINK
THAT'S A VERY, VERY BAD THING TO
HAVE DONE, BECAUSE THIS PROJECT
IS ABOUT FAR MORE THAN THAT.
IT'S ABOUT MOBILITY.
IT'S ABOUT INCLUSIVENESS.
IT'S ABOUT AFFORDABILITY.
IT'S ABOUT POTENTIALLY CREATING
A NEW TIMBER INDUSTRY FOR
ONTARIO.
IT'S ABOUT A WHOLE RANGE OF
TOPICS, AND TO JUST CHARACTERIZE
IT AS A PURELY DIGITAL PROJECT.
THE DIGITAL IS IN SUPPORT OF
MANY OTHER THINGS.
SO I WAS AT THE DESIGN REVIEW
PANEL YESTERDAY, AND SIDEWALK
BEGAN TO PRESENT THEIR
BUILDING... THAT THEY WANT TO
USE.
IT'S NOT A PROPOSAL, AGAIN, IT'S
A SET OF IDEAS.
A LOT OF EXCITEMENT FROM THE
LEADING ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS
IN TORONTO, IN ONTARIO, IN
CANADA, THAT THIS PROJECT HAS
THE POTENTIAL TO BE
TRANSFORMATIVE AND VERY EXCITING
AND A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE.
DID THEY WANT MORE DETAILS?
YES.
WERE THEY SKEPTICAL ABOUT SOME
OF THE PROPOSALS?
YES.
BUT WERE THEY ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT
THE POTENTIAL?
YES.

Steve says ALSO YES.
BIANCA?

Bianca says THE FACT
WE'VE BEEN TALKING THIS MUCH
ABOUT PRIVACY IS ANOTHER
INDICATOR THAT WE ARE OFF THE
RAILS HERE IN TERMS OF THE SCOPE
OF WHAT WE SHOULD BE TALKING
ABOUT.
PRIVACY, YES, IS A THING.
HOWEVER, FROM THE BUSINESS
COMMUNITY'S PERSPECTIVE, EVEN
WITHIN CANADA, THERE ARE SO MANY
OTHER ISSUES HERE AROUND HOW
THAT DATA SHOULD BE USED
POTENTIALLY IN COMMERCIAL
CIRCUMSTANCES AND THAT'S GOING
TO BE PART OF THE DATA
GOVERNANCE DISCUSSION.
ALSO THE FACT THAT SIDEWALK
WENT... AND THIS IS WHAT I'M
TALKING ABOUT FRAMING THINGS...
SAID WE SHOULD OPEN A WHOLE
BUNCH OF DATA.
AND THAT MEANS THAT ALL THIS
DATA SHOULD BE AVAILABLE TO
EVERYBODY WITH AN OPEN LICENCE,
FOR EVERYBODY TO SHARE IN THE
SPOILS OF URBAN INNOVATION.
AND WHAT I WANT TO BE SUPER
CLEAR ABOUT FOR EVERYBODY WHO
HAS HEARD THAT TERM, THAT OPEN
DATA WILL BE SOMETHING THAT'S
GREAT FOR EVERYBODY HERE, IS TO
BE VERY, VERY CLEAR THAT THERE
IS A MASSIVE POWER ASYMMETRY
BETWEEN COMPANIES LIKE ALPHABET
AND OTHER USERS OF DATA, AND
THAT IT IS COMPLETELY
DISINGENUOUS TO MAKE IT SEEM
LIKE WE'RE ALL GOING TO BE
SHARESIES NOW.
WHEN WHAT IT MEANS WHEN YOU HAVE
SO MUCH DATA ALREADY, TO ADD
MORE TO YOUR STOCK PILE AND DO
SOMETHING WITH IT IS A TOTALLY
DIFFERENT GAME THAN SOMEONE WHO
IS JUST GETTING ACCESS TO THIS
DATA.
THERE'S A COMPLEXITY TO THE
ECONOMICS HERE.
IF WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT
THIS TO BE DOING GOOD BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENT AROUND URBAN
INNOVATION AND DATA AND
GOVERNANCE OF DATA AND
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND ALL
THIS, WE SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT
ALL OF THOSE THINGS TO THE SAME
DEGREE THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING
ABOUT PRIVACY.

Steve says I'M DOWN TO A COUPLE
MINUTES LEFT.
TIME FLIES WHEN YOU'RE HAVING
FUN.
YOU MENTIONED THE BUSINESS
COMMUNITY.
YOU'RE WITH CIGI.
YOU KNOW JIM BALSILLIE, THE
CO-FOUNDER OF RIM...

A quote appears on screen, under the title "Irreversible impact?" The quote reads "From the start, this project should have been debated publicly and involved experts in IP and data. Instead, Waterfront Toronto continues to weaponize ambiguity while making irreversible decisions that will have major negative effects on all Canadians. Is this how we want our cities and the future of our country managed?"
Quoted from Jim Balsillie, The Globe and Mail. October 5, 2018.

Steve says DO YOU WANT TO TAKE
THE FIRST KICK AT THAT?

Mark says THERE ARE NO IRREVOCABLE
DECISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE.
JIM BALSILLIE DID HIMSELF NO
CREDIT IN THAT OP-ED IN THE WAY
HE WAS ANGRY AND AT TIMES,
FRANKLY, INSULTING.
HE HAS REDUCED THE CREDIBILITY
OF HIS WORDS AND POSITION IN
THIS.
THERE ARE CERTAINLY THINGS I
WOULD AGREE WITH JIM BALSILLIE
ON, WHICH IS THAT WE HAVE NOT
DONE A PROPER JOB IN FACT OF
LETTING OUR CANADIAN COMPANIES
GROW TO SCALE AND TAKING
ADVANTAGE OF THE IP THAT'S
CREATED HERE.
I THINK THAT'S AN ISSUE THAT'S
VERY IMPORTANT, IT'S AN
IMPORTANT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ISSUE, AND ONE OF THE
TRANSITIONS THAT SIDEWALK HAS
PROPOSED.
THIS IS A BIG CHANGE IN HOW
THEY'RE APPROACHING DIGITAL.
INSTEAD OF CREATING A SINGLE
DIGITAL LAYER THAT EVERYBODY HAS
TO USE, THEY SAY THEY'RE
ABANDONING THAT IDEA, THEY'RE
MAKING A FRAMEWORK, MUCH LIKE
THE INTERNET, THAT ANYONE CAN
COME IN AND PLAY IN.
THAT'S GOING TO CREATE MORE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY
FOR ALL OF US, WHICH I THINK IS
VERY IMPORTANT.

Steve says SAADIA, THE LAST WORD?

Saadia says I THINK
IT'S IMPORTANT TO START TALKING
ABOUT A YEAR-PLUS INTO THIS,
WHAT'S IN IT FOR THE CITY OF
TORONTO AND ITS RESIDENTS?
LET'S TALK ABOUT THE ECONOMICS
OF WHAT'S AT PLAY.
WE HAVE SOME OF THE MOST
LUCRATIVE LAND IN NORTH AMERICA,
PERHAPS EVEN THE WORLD, THAT IS
BEING CONSIDERED FOR THIS.
WE KEEP HEARING THAT THE
ADVANTAGES OF THE JOBS AND THE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WILL ONLY
PAN OUT IF ITS AT SCALE, WHICH
MEANS WE'RE LOOKING AT MORE THAN
QUAYSIDE.
SO THE WORLD IS WATCHING US.
WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL IN TAKING
INTO ACCOUNT LESSONS THAT HAVE
BEEN LEARNED ELSEWHERE IN THE
WORLD AND MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE
DO HERE ACTUALLY CORRESPONDS TO
THE RESPONSIBILITY OF WHAT WE
HAVE.
AND LET'S TALK ABOUT ALL THE
COMPLICATED FACTORS THAT WE
HAVE.
LET'S TALK ABOUT DATA.
WE CAN'T NOT TALK ABOUT DATA.
IT CAN'T BE SOMETHING THAT COMES
AFTERWARDS.
PRIVACY IS ONE THING.
ALSO THE VALUE OF THAT DATA.
SHOULDN'T THE RESIDENTS OF
TORONTO GET TO DECIDE IF THEY
WANT TO ACTUALLY BENEFIT
DIRECTLY FROM IT?
AND OUR DIGITAL INFRASTRUCTURE
SHOULD BE BY OUR PUBLIC
INSTITUTIONS.
WHY DO WE HAVE AN AMERICAN
COMPANY COMING HERE AND DOING THIS?

The caption changes to "Producer: Cara Stern, @carastern."

Steve says I THINK WE HAVE
STARTED TO ASK AND POTENTIALLY
ANSWER SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS
AND SOME WE WILL HAVE TO ANSWER
NEXT TIME.
I WANT TO THANK OF YOU FOR
COMING IN TO TVO TONIGHT AND
HAVING A VIGOROUS AND CIVILIZED
DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS VERY
IMPORTANT TOPIC.
THANK YOU, ALL.

All the guests say THANK YOU.

Watch: A Year of Planning Quayside