Hot off the presses. I have not read it all but thought I would post this for the Canadian Members - lurkers of the forum. VERY important as this is the best indication of how Canada is dealing with the Y2K problem. The good part.... the Army figures a 30 day deployment for problems... the bad part.... health.  INDYEV122-e
http://www.parl.gc.ca/InfoComDoc/36/1/INDY/Meetings/Evidence/indyev122-e.htm

I'd like to welcome General Henault, Mr. Paul Thibault and the Vice-Chief of the
Defence staff, Vice-Admiral Garnett.

Will Mr. Henault or Mr. Thibault be making the initial presentation?

Mr. Paul Thibault (Federal Coordinator, Y2K National Contingency
Planning, Department of National Defence): I'll be doing that, Mr.
Chairman.

The Vice-Chairman (Mr. Eugène Bellemare): Before you start, I'd like to
mention the committee is quite proud of the Canadian Armed Forces and we
congratulate you for all the good work you've been doing here in Canada as well as
abroad.

Mr. Paul Thibault: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

The Vice-Chairman (Mr. Eugène Bellemare): It is now 4:37 p.m. and we
will go to the second part of this afternoon's meeting. We will be hearing several
witnesses from Health Canada including Dann Nichols, Director General, Health
Protection Branch, Therapeutic Products Program.

[English]

We have Marie Williams, Director General, Health Canada Y2K Project Directorate.

[Translation]

We are also welcoming Ms. Fruji Bull, Director General, Information Management
Services. Is she here?

[English]

Ms. Marie Williams (Director General, Health Canada Y2K Project
Directorate, Corporate Services Branch, Health Canada): Mrs. Bull is in
the room, but she isn't at the table.

[Translation]

The Vice-Chairman (Mr. Eugène Bellemare): From the Department of
Foreign Affairs and International Trade we have Mr. William De Laat, Director,
Policy and International Coordination; Annick Goulet, Analyst and François Rivest,
Coordinator.

From Treasury Board Secretariat we welcome Linda Lizotte-MacPherson;

[English]

Guy McKenzie, Assistant Secretary, Year 2000 Project Office; Jim Bimson,
Director General, Departmental Readiness, Year 2000 Project Office.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), June 01, 1999

Answers

Here is the essential info. Seems to go against the doomer philosophy:

Utilities. All are on schedule, including electrical power systems, water purification, sewage treatment, the natural gas industry and the oil industry. The overall assessment, therefore, is that they are on schedule for both compliance and contingency planning for all sectors.

-- Canada guy (stick@ontheice.com), June 01, 1999.

It's no problem at all here in Canada. It's an easy solution for everyone in the USA. Come to Canada for Y2K. Your dollar is at a premium and everything is compliant.(NOT!!!!!)This is an easy read between the lines. Self reporting disclaimers. It's already been established that Canadian companies are lieing about there compliance and their progress towards that end. I love the phraseology in this report: All are on schedule Most are on schedule A few, however, are behind schedule, etc. In fact the word schedule is mentioned no less than 21 times in the first 4 pages but no discussion of what the schedule is is alluded to. I don't get warm fuzzy feelings from these statements: "For trucking, urban transportation and bus services, we don't have any information yet." "As for ferries, in some cases, they're on schedule and in others they are a bit behind for conformity as for emergency planning." huh? "As for maritime transportation, they're on schedule in certain respects and they're behind in others."

See I told you everything here is a-ok.

-- naughtybunny (neilw@infoserve.net), June 01, 1999.

"I don't get warm fuzzy feelings..."

Perhaps you would be more comfortable at a petting zoo?

-- Canada guy (stick@ontheice.com), June 01, 1999.

That's a crude attempt at humor, Johnny.

-- (who@what.where), June 01, 1999.

"It's already been established that Canadian companies are lieing about there compliance"

Please provide some evidence of this.

p.s. It's "lying" and "their"

-- Schoolmarm (hates@doomers&illiterates.com), June 01, 1999.

http://www.canoe.com/TechNews9906/01_y2k.html

Tuesday, June 1, 1999

Private and public sector slipping on Y2K

By JENNIFER DITCHBURN -- The Canadian Press

OTTAWA (CP) -- Canadian businesses and governments are having trouble meeting self-imposed deadlines to ready their computers for the year 2000, says a new federal report.

The Commons industry committee singled out slippage on Y2K remediation plans as one of the biggest problems facing Canada's efforts to beat the bug.

Delays in many industries could cause major disruptions, the committee said.

Some of the dozens of witnesses that appeared before the committee admitted they were being thrown off schedule because of unforeseen problems, such as finding imbedded computer chips unexpectedly and having to check them out.

"We're just concerned that some of the large companies that were leading the pack have come forward and say their dates are delayed by three or four months," said committee chairwoman Susan Whelan.

"We know there are other companies out there that haven't set a date, so we're a little concerned that some of them need to get right on track right now."

The MPs recommended that more be done to encourage organizations to keep up their efforts.

It also urged Ottawa to engage in a little slippage of its own, by extending the deadline on a tax break offered to businesses that need to replace their computers and software to deal with the year 2000 problem.

For the first time, the committee also examined the voluntary sector, composed of approximately 175,000 organizations.

It found that non-profit agencies are at a distinct disadvantage because they lack the financial and human resources to fix computer equipment that is often outdated and more glitch-prone.

"Financially it's always an issue when you have to take 286s, 386s, and 486s and make them 2000 compatible," said Joanne Cooper, executive director of the Volunteer Centre of Toronto.

"It means you have to buy new equipment and there's no money in the system to pay for that."

The non-profit sector is not eligible for year 2000-related tax breaks, but the committee is recommending that federal and provincial governments make more resources available to them.

The industry committee has been one of the only agencies consistently monitoring the country's progress on the year 2000 issue and making its findings public.

It has repeatedly pointed to the health sector as a cause of concern. Statistics Canada recently reported that only 42 per cent of hospitals and care homes expect to have all their critical systems ready by August.

Witnesses told MPs that part of the problem with tackling the millennium bug is compiling information on all the diverse elements of the health-care sector, then sharing a small pool of skilled computer consultants.

The committee also identified stockpiling of medical supplies and pharmaceuticals as a potential problem, since health-care organizations and consumers alike could contribute to shortages.

It recommended the federal government decide whether it should engage in stockpiling itself, and if yes, determine a policy for allocating the products.

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), June 01, 1999.

"It's already been established that Canadian companies are lieing about there compliance"

Please provide some evidence of this.

p.s. It's "lying" and "their"

-- Schoolmarm (hates@doomers&illiterates.com), June 01, 1999.

School Marm

Stats. Canada did a survey on Y2K. They found the business are at risk of being to late in their remediation. This is a risk and not a certianty. Lying would be to strong a word,,,, maybe.

School Marm - if you are in Canada and conserned about Y2K in anyway you should study the risks.

http://www.parl.gc.ca/InfoComDoc/36/1/INDY/Meetings/Evidence/ indyev116-e.htm

-- Brian (imager@home.com), June 01, 1999.

Canada Guy

It is better than I would expect, and they have little reason to fudge the facts. The health industy and food though are a possible risk and transportation was a no show.

I know in BC this is what the Government is watching carefully. For the power supply they feel the comunications aspect is the greatest risk. Ferries... I live on an island .....

-- Brian (imager@home.com), June 01, 1999.

It was written above:

""I don't get warm fuzzy feelings..." Perhaps you would be more comfortable at a petting zoo?

-- Canada guy (stick@ontheice.com), June 01, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

That's a crude attempt at humor, Johnny.

-- (who@what.where), June 01, 1999.

--------------------------------------------------

Johnny Canuck (i.e. me) did not write the "petting zoo" comment. who.what.where seems to have assumed too much with the "stick.on.the.ice" e-mail address.

As those of you who read my remarks about the long black trains (with the maple leaf painted on the side) several weeks ago will know, my humour is not crude.

-- Johnny Canuck (nospam@eh.com), June 01, 1999.

"Perhaps you would be more comfortable at a petting zoo?" Nice contribution Canada guy. If this is the best you can manage you're an embarrassment to Canada.

"p.s. It"s "lying" and "their" I am new to the forum and was not aware that this was actually a spelling and grammatical excersise. You and Canada guy should get together and perhaps between the two of you, you could generate some thoughtful discourse.

Have any of you had any meaningful dialogue with your municipal governments? I've spoken with the Y2K co-ordinator in my community and they do not have any contingency plans. They are relying on the plans of the Emergency Preparedness Program. They do not have any plans to develop a contingency plan. They are not making any recommendations above the 2 to 3 day winter storm scenario. When I asked for further information they forwarded me copies of existing documents to assist in the preparation for an earthquake as well as literature from BC Hydro, BC Gas, and BC Tel. All standard boilerplate stating that they will be fine if the other players are fine, however, you should be prepared for localized disruptions. When I asked for a definition of "localised" they were unable to give me a concise answer. I don't recal the specifics, but I recall reading an article from the Westergard site where the same question was asked of a NERC public relations person and their response was to the effect that if the power was out in a particular state, that it would be considered localised. If the power was out in many states in the same geographic area, that was considered regional. I would be interested in hearing about other Canadian's direct experience with their respective community Y2K representatives.

-- naughtybunny (neilw@infoserve.net), June 02, 1999.

Naughty

My City Hall is a few trailers in a lot :o) So my "city" risk is slim as the provide minimal service. BC Hydro says they have completed their remediation, BC Tel. is now operational in Y2K, BC Gas ?

The biggest problem I see is the treatment of sewage. No real back up on the current situation but they were a little behind in my opinion ( anyone that starts fixing THIS YEAR.) Health, transportation (specially shipping) and food are a ligit reason to be conserned. This is not just my opinion.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), June 02, 1999.