Whereas, the TNC pledged during the recent campaign to create a citizen skills inventory which will be used as a part of the Service Corps Initiative in compiling a voluntary knowledge base of those possessing useful professional skills in potential government service for use by incoming administrations in search of technocratic talent, and
Whereas, as a part of this effort it is planned to introduce an optional question to the upcoming National Census, and
Whereas, under the relevant section of El Lexhatx C.1.2.2.2 is as follows: "Other questions on the Talossan Census shall be identical to the questions on the last census. These questions may be changed by the Chancery, either of its own volition or on request from the Seneschal, but any changes shall be approved by the Ziu, without needing to go through committee. These questions will be marked as optional, and at no time shall a citizen be forced or required to respond to an optional question."
Therefore, the Office of the Seneschal instructs HM Chancery to include the following additional question on the next census and submits same to the Ziu for approval:"
Service Corps Initiative. As a part of an effort to assist with recruitment of skilled volunteers the Government is collecting information from citizens concerning their available skills and their willingness to use them in service to the nation. In the space below, please describe skills and experience which you possess (ex: translation, social media management, database administration, website editing and maintenance, etc.)
Uréu q'estadra så:
Breneir Tzaracomprada (Sen-FL, TNC)
If I may,
Before this goes to a vote, I would appreciate the opportunity to at least find out if this is even technically feasible given our current database. I personally cannot alter the census form, and this would require programming from our current database administrator.
Quote from: Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB on February 06, 2023, 11:27:58 AMIf I may,
Before this goes to a vote, I would appreciate the opportunity to at least find out if this is even technically feasible given our current database. I personally cannot alter the census form, and this would require programming from our current database administrator.
I recognize we used the database previously but we are not required to, right? Google Forms or Microsoft Forms would be perfectly reasonable platforms for distributing the Census and retrieving the results. Others please chime in but I don't want us to be constrained by any technical limitations in the Database.
I don't think there's any reason we need to use the database? The census responses aren't tied to anyone specific in a verifiable way.
The responses are not tied to individuals, but that is a factor in determining if a citizen is going to lose their citizenship and that IS tracked in the current database. MPF would have to manually change everyone's database file if we used an alternate means.
I'm only asking that when major changes are planned, we determine AS PART OF THE CHANGE how we will accomplish it.
Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 06, 2023, 12:13:08 PMI don't think there's any reason we need to use the database? The census responses aren't tied to anyone specific in a verifiable way.
I would support not using the database initially and manually updating later if necessary.
According to El.Lex C "1.2.2.3. Any information collected during the census that would individually identify any person or persons, including their contact information, shall be withheld from the public for to protect individual privacy, consistent with Lex.D.8. The only exception is that citizens may opt to have their e-mail address shared with party leaders, pursuant to Lex.D.8.5.4. Census information shall not be released under any "freedom of information" or "government transparency" requests, notwithstanding any other provisions of el Lexhatx. (52RZ4) (53RZ2)"
By using a form that is not tied to an individual's private database account, the only information I can collect cannot identify them in any way. Creating this skills inventory is a good idea, but legally I cannot provide any information from it unless a citizen opts to share his or her email address "with party leaders." This means that even asking their name on the census, while ok to ask I'd presume, I cannot share it with anyone. Any skills identified would not be tied to any individual person. There are a LOT of reasons why this law needs to be more thought out. As El. Lex is written, the question could be asked, but we'd have no way of knowing who answered it.
Quote from: Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB on February 06, 2023, 12:16:13 PMThe responses are not tied to individuals, but that is a factor in determining if a citizen is going to lose their citizenship and that IS tracked in the current database. MPF would have to manually change everyone's database file if we used an alternate means.
I'm only asking that when major changes are planned, we determine AS PART OF THE CHANGE how we will accomplish it.
I appreciate what the SoS is saying, major changes should be discussed - which is why we have the Hopper to try and thrash things out, to see what is possible and what isn't.
However
(and I am by no means an IT expert here, so please correct me if I'm wrong), I don't envision adding one text box to the current census programme/file/database should be too much of an issue?
Quote from: Dame Litz Cjantscheir, UrN on February 06, 2023, 01:11:17 PMHowever (and I am by no means an IT expert here, so please correct me if I'm wrong), I don't envision adding one text box to the current census programme/file/database should be too much of an issue?
I don't believe this is a problem either. I'm just stating that it'd be beneficial for me to explore that option. The other ideas suggested I don't think will be feasible given current law.
However, we run up against privacy law here as well. I can collect the skills inventory, I can't share what they said if it identifies them.
Quote from: Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB on February 06, 2023, 01:16:49 PMQuote from: Dame Litz Cjantscheir, UrN on February 06, 2023, 01:11:17 PMHowever (and I am by no means an IT expert here, so please correct me if I'm wrong), I don't envision adding one text box to the current census programme/file/database should be too much of an issue?
I don't believe this is a problem either. I'm just stating that it'd be beneficial for me to explore that option. The other ideas suggested I don't think will be feasible given current law.
However, we run up against privacy law here as well. I can collect the skills inventory, I can't share what they said if it identifies them.
I fully understand what you're trying to say, but current legal issues aside (which are within the powers of the Ziu to amend, if they see fit) - I do agree with you that we need clarification of what is or isn't possible with the current census/database system so the Ziu can look at alternatives, and if need be, pass legislation to that effect.
Quote from: Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB on February 06, 2023, 12:16:13 PMThe responses are not tied to individuals, but that is a factor in determining if a citizen is going to lose their citizenship and that IS tracked in the current database. MPF would have to manually change everyone's database file if we used an alternate means.
I'm only asking that when major changes are planned, we determine AS PART OF THE CHANGE how we will accomplish it.
This is a really good point -- I'd forgotten about that!
I guess there's no rush about the census, and we can maybe try to see if it's possible to edit it and/or if it's possible to replace the database with something that others can manage.
Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 06, 2023, 01:31:10 PMI guess there's no rush about the census, and we can maybe try to see if it's possible to edit it and/or if it's possible to replace the database with something that others can manage.
I'm seriously not trying to rain on anyone's parade here, but also keep in mind anyone with back-end access to the database must by law be a member of the Chancery. All of that information is legally protected and not just anyone can see it. Heck, there are things even I as the Secretary of State can't see!
I understand that there will be a lot of logistical hurdles, in addition to the technical problem itself. But, and I'm only speaking for myself here, I am frankly sick to death of this whole thing. I feel like we are dealing with problems with the database every few months now. It's been a great tool, but it is simply impossible to rely upon it indefinitely under these circumstances, and it's probably not very fair to MPF either.
So my hope is that we can just get retire it and implement something a lot simpler.
Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 06, 2023, 01:52:45 PMI understand that there will be a lot of logistical hurdles, in addition to the technical problem itself. But, and I'm only speaking for myself here, I am frankly sick to death of this whole thing. I feel like we are dealing with problems with the database every few months now. It's been a great tool, but it is simply impossible to rely upon it indefinitely under these circumstances, and it's probably not very fair to MPF either.
So my hope is that we can just get retire it and implement something a lot simpler.
The problem is not just the database Baron. An even larger problem is the existing privacy laws in El. Lex. I've no problem using a Google Form, for example. However, I cannot share any of that information with anyone outside the Chancery. That is where the real problem lies. This law, if enacted as written, would be illegal.
Quote from: Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB on February 06, 2023, 01:56:37 PMQuote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 06, 2023, 01:52:45 PMI understand that there will be a lot of logistical hurdles, in addition to the technical problem itself. But, and I'm only speaking for myself here, I am frankly sick to death of this whole thing. I feel like we are dealing with problems with the database every few months now. It's been a great tool, but it is simply impossible to rely upon it indefinitely under these circumstances, and it's probably not very fair to MPF either.
So my hope is that we can just get retire it and implement something a lot simpler.
The problem is not just the database Baron. An even larger problem is the existing privacy laws in El. Lex. I've no problem using a Google Form, for example. However, I cannot share any of that information with anyone outside the Chancery. That is where the real problem lies. This law, if enacted as written, would be illegal.
Whoa, that's a bit too far. This bill asks for an additional question to the Census. There is NOTHING illegal with the enactment of this act.
Okay, outgoing Attorney-General chiming in here.
Given the current section of El Lexh:
QuoteC 1.2.2.3. Any information collected during the census that would individually identify any person or persons, including their contact information, shall be withheld from the public for to protect individual privacy, consistent with Lex.D.8. The only exception is that citizens may opt to have their e-mail address shared with party leaders, pursuant to Lex.D.8.5.4. Census information shall not be released under any "freedom of information" or "government transparency" requests, notwithstanding any other provisions of el Lexhatx.
It seems to me that the bolded bit is the crux here. I haven't seen that the TNC proposal requires any such information to be released to "the public" - but to the Government, confidentially. Is the Chancery's interpretation that "the public" means anyone who's not in the Chancery?
Quote from: Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB on February 06, 2023, 01:56:37 PMQuote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 06, 2023, 01:52:45 PMI understand that there will be a lot of logistical hurdles, in addition to the technical problem itself. But, and I'm only speaking for myself here, I am frankly sick to death of this whole thing. I feel like we are dealing with problems with the database every few months now. It's been a great tool, but it is simply impossible to rely upon it indefinitely under these circumstances, and it's probably not very fair to MPF either.
So my hope is that we can just get retire it and implement something a lot simpler.
The problem is not just the database Baron. An even larger problem is the existing privacy laws in El. Lex. I've no problem using a Google Form, for example. However, I cannot share any of that information with anyone outside the Chancery. That is where the real problem lies. This law, if enacted as written, would be illegal.
A law cannot be illegal, by definition, but I take your point. It would definitely conflict with other points of law and might not work as intended.
Hm. Breneir, maybe the thing to do here is just to take the census out of it? Is there any reason why we can't just direct the Chancery to send out a survey by itself?
But why do you even need a law? Previous Governments sent out the National Activity Survey without need of an authorising law, and with the Chancery's cooperation
Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 06, 2023, 02:29:02 PMBut why do you even need a law? Previous Governments sent out the National Activity Survey without need of an authorising law, and with the Chancery's cooperation
It was the using the Census part that necessitated the approval of the Ziu. I figured using the Census would be more efficient but technical issues with the database and the Privacy Law have negated any potential gains in efficiency.
Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 06, 2023, 02:10:39 PMOkay, outgoing Attorney-General chiming in here.
Given the current section of El Lexh:
QuoteC 1.2.2.3. Any information collected during the census that would individually identify any person or persons, including their contact information, shall be withheld from the public for to protect individual privacy, consistent with Lex.D.8. The only exception is that citizens may opt to have their e-mail address shared with party leaders, pursuant to Lex.D.8.5.4. Census information shall not be released under any "freedom of information" or "government transparency" requests, notwithstanding any other provisions of el Lexhatx.
It seems to me that the bolded bit is the crux here. I haven't seen that the TNC proposal requires any such information to be released to "the public" - but to the Government, confidentially. Is the Chancery's interpretation that "the public" means anyone who's not in the Chancery?
I think this needs answering as this was my understanding as well.
Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on February 06, 2023, 02:31:40 PMQuote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 06, 2023, 02:29:02 PMBut why do you even need a law? Previous Governments sent out the National Activity Survey without need of an authorising law, and with the Chancery's cooperation
It was the using the Census part that necessitated the approval of the Ziu. I figured using the Census would be more efficient but technical issues with the database and the Privacy Law have negated any potential gains in efficiency.s
Understood. My reaction is that the Census only has to be carried out once every 2 years so it's not that useful for collecting timely information on whether new citizens have skills. On the other hand, I understand the interest in making more use of the Census, which is at the moment something of a useless appendix, only really used to help inactive citizens avoid "striking out".
I'd suggest that this survey be enacted along the same lines as the old National Activity Survey, but that the incoming Government think more about how to make the Census more useful (and perhaps amend privacy law?)
Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 06, 2023, 02:37:46 PMQuote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on February 06, 2023, 02:31:40 PMQuote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 06, 2023, 02:29:02 PMBut why do you even need a law? Previous Governments sent out the National Activity Survey without need of an authorising law, and with the Chancery's cooperation
It was the using the Census part that necessitated the approval of the Ziu. I figured using the Census would be more efficient but technical issues with the database and the Privacy Law have negated any potential gains in efficiency.s
Understood. My reaction is that the Census only has to be carried out once every 2 years so it's not that useful for collecting timely information on whether new citizens have skills. On the other hand, I understand the interest in making more use of the Census, which is at the moment something of a useless appendix, only really used to help inactive citizens avoid "striking out".
I'd suggest that this survey be enacted along the same lines as the old National Activity Survey, but that the incoming Government think more about how to make the Census more useful (and perhaps amend privacy law?)
Thank you Miestra. I'm just fine with a stand-alone survey. But every two years would be fine as far the data collection interval. I do like the idea of using the Census if we can address the database and privacy issues and am thinking of a change that specifies confidential government use.
Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on February 06, 2023, 02:32:01 PMQuote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 06, 2023, 02:10:39 PMOkay, outgoing Attorney-General chiming in here.
Given the current section of El Lexh:
QuoteC 1.2.2.3. Any information collected during the census that would individually identify any person or persons, including their contact information, shall be withheld from the public for to protect individual privacy, consistent with Lex.D.8. The only exception is that citizens may opt to have their e-mail address shared with party leaders, pursuant to Lex.D.8.5.4. Census information shall not be released under any "freedom of information" or "government transparency" requests, notwithstanding any other provisions of el Lexhatx.
It seems to me that the bolded bit is the crux here. I haven't seen that the TNC proposal requires any such information to be released to "the public" - but to the Government, confidentially. Is the Chancery's interpretation that "the public" means anyone who's not in the Chancery?
I think this needs answering as this was my understanding as well.
My concern is not necessarily in giving the government confidential information. My concern is that the law conflicts in that giving information that can identify someone is a problem. If you all want to write a law like this, I'm not standing in your way. I'm merely pointing out, perhaps clumsily, that I don't relish the thought of someone potentially suing the Chancery because someone in the government got information that could be protected, such as identifying information. The law in question uses the word "public" so perhaps a clarification of that particular piece of law as to what "public" means? Does that mean anyone outside the Chancery, or something far less specific?
In any event, I've belabored the point and will stop giving my input on this.
Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 06, 2023, 02:22:04 PMHm. Breneir, maybe the thing to do here is just to take the census out of it? Is there any reason why we can't just direct the Chancery to send out a survey by itself?
This is the crucial point. Clearly C 1.2.2.3 was written with the Census as a "real" census possibly collecting various categories of personal information (like employments, age, degrees, etc), and not a general collection of skills.
With C 1.2.2.3 written as it is I agree it's difficult to collect those «
during the census» without modifying it, but as that section stands it works in achieving its original purpose.
It seems to me beyond the scope of the original idea and too unnecessarily laborious to meedle with C 1.2.2.3 just to do something that could be enacted in a more simple way without modifying a law that works.
Something like the original question at the start of this thread doesn't necessarily conflict in my view with D.8.2 or D.8.4. Of course it should be worded carefully, and individual answers of a citizen might contain personal informations that may fall within the protected areas of D.8, so every answer will need a sort of "confidentiality revision".
Also, there's no
real gain in efficiency in doing it «
during the census». A simple survey can be e-mailed to every citizen by the Chancery any time.
Quote from: Üc R. Tärfâ on February 06, 2023, 06:07:09 PMQuote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 06, 2023, 02:22:04 PMHm. Breneir, maybe the thing to do here is just to take the census out of it? Is there any reason why we can't just direct the Chancery to send out a survey by itself?
This is the crucial point. Clearly C 1.2.2.3 was written with the Census as a "real" census possibly collecting various categories of personal information (like employments, age, degrees, etc), and not a general collection of skills.
With C 1.2.2.3 written as it is I agree it's difficult to collect those «during the census» without modifying it, but as that section stands it works in achieving its original purpose.
It seems to me beyond the scope of the original idea and too unnecessarily laborious to meedle with C 1.2.2.3 just to do something that could be enacted in a more simple way without modifying a law that works.
Something like the original question at the start of this thread doesn't necessarily conflict in my view with D.8.2 or D.8.4. Of course it should be worded carefully, and individual answers of a citizen might contain personal informations that may fall within the protected areas of D.8, so every answer will need a sort of "confidentiality revision".
Also, there's no real gain in efficiency in doing it «during the census». A simple survey can be e-mailed to every citizen by the Chancery any time.
Simultaneous collection of additional information through one distribution would be a clear gain in efficiency. The word real is playing a heavily subjective role here.
I respectfully withdraw this bill from consideration. The goal of the Service Corps Initiative remains but good points have been made by multiple contributors. The resolve clause is not contrary to any law or unfeasible with respect to enactment itself. But it is a part of a larger course of administrative action which does face technical challenges. I will seek alternative routes toward implementing the Initiative
I appreciate the contributions here which have reiterated more urgent courses of needed action that I will discuss with the incoming Cabinet.
One alternative to updating a database would be to create a timebank
I am a member of TimeBank Boulder and we use https://hourworld.org/index.htm to indicate what offers are made of services, and to discover what offers are out there for request.
How it Works
Members share their talents and services, record their hours, then 'spend' them later on services others provide. Everyone's hours are equal. This is not barter. Members provide friendly neighborly favors. Together we are strengthening the fabric of local communities.
Quote from: xpb on February 06, 2023, 08:26:42 PMOne alternative to updating a database would be to create a timebank
I am a member of TimeBank Boulder and we use https://hourworld.org/index.htm to indicate what offers are made of services, and to discover what offers are out there for request.
How it Works
Members share their talents and services, record their hours, then 'spend' them later on services others provide. Everyone's hours are equal. This is not barter. Members provide friendly neighborly favors. Together we are strengthening the fabric of local communities.
I am quite familiar with TimeBanking and its quite cool you are involved with it in Boulder. I participated in it while living in Maine back in 2003-2004 and made some long-lasting connections.
Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on February 06, 2023, 08:38:41 PMQuote from: xpb on February 06, 2023, 08:26:42 PMOne alternative to updating a database would be to create a timebank
I am a member of TimeBank Boulder and we use https://hourworld.org/index.htm to indicate what offers are made of services, and to discover what offers are out there for request.
How it Works
Members share their talents and services, record their hours, then 'spend' them later on services others provide. Everyone's hours are equal. This is not barter. Members provide friendly neighborly favors. Together we are strengthening the fabric of local communities.
I am quite familiar with TimeBanking and its quite cool you are involved with it in Boulder. I participated in it while living in Maine back in 2003-2004 and made some long-lasting connections.
Ok great - glad you are familiar. It appears that a system could be established without cost, and citizens could list things that they would like to provide to others. I have done lasercutting remotely for people then sent items by mail. There are various consultations that can be done, data processed, etc that could be useful to put into the system, and with the networking between systems more may become aware of Talossa as a secondary purpose. This of course would just be an altruistic, voluntary activity.
I like this. I've never heard of it but I like it!
I have was referred from hourworld.org and received a demo login from ADBdT (Association for the Development of Timebanks). I will be setting up a prototype for Cézembre for review.
The Association was founded in Barcelona, Spain in 2012 and is run by several TimeBank activists, passionate for timebanks that work pro bono on developing tools to facilitate the management of timebanks, share best practices and give visibility to the timebank movement. https://www.timeoverflow.org/
A prototype Timebank for Cézembre has been established at https://www.timeoverflow.org/organizations/395
Thus far I have listed offers for lasercutting and 3d printing, and requests for list-type trivia questions. Let me know if you would like to join this test - I will be happy to add you just send me a PM.
Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on February 06, 2023, 10:39:31 AMWhereas, the TNC pledged during the recent campaign to create a citizen skills inventory which will be used as a part of the Service Corps Initiative in compiling a voluntary knowledge base of those possessing useful professional skills in potential government service for use by incoming administrations in search of technocratic talent, and
Whereas, as a part of this effort it is planned to introduce an optional question to the upcoming National Census, and
Whereas, under the relevant section of El Lexhatx C.1.2.2.2 is as follows: "Other questions on the Talossan Census shall be identical to the questions on the last census. These questions may be changed by the Chancery, either of its own volition or on request from the Seneschal, but any changes shall be approved by the Ziu, without needing to go through committee. These questions will be marked as optional, and at no time shall a citizen be forced or required to respond to an optional question."
Therefore, the Office of the Seneschal instructs HM Chancery to include the following additional question on the next census and submits same to the Ziu for approval:"
Service Corps Initiative. As a part of an effort to assist with recruitment of skilled volunteers the Government is collecting information from citizens concerning their available skills and their willingness to use them in service to the nation. In the space below, please describe skills and experience which you possess (ex: translation, social media management, database administration, website editing and maintenance, etc.)
Uréu q'estadra så:
Breneir Tzaracomprada (Sen-FL, TNC)
I first want to thank the Chancery for publicly stating their interpretation of privacy laws and their impact on the Government's proposal to use the Census. In order to comply with this interpretation I will be making revisions to the above-quoted proposal for consideration in The Hopper soon.
National Skills and Social Connections Survey ActWhereas, the TNC pledged during the recent campaign to create a citizen skills inventory which will be used as a part of the Service Corps Initiative in compiling a voluntary knowledge base of those possessing useful professional skills in potential government service for use by incoming administrations in search of technocratic talent, and
Whereas, as a part of this effort it is planned to introduce optional questions to the upcoming National Census, and
Whereas, the relevant section of El Lexhatx C.1.2.2.2 is as follows: "Other questions on the Talossan Census shall be identical to the questions on the last census. These questions may be changed by the Chancery, either of its own volition or on request from the Seneschal, but any changes shall be approved by the Ziu, without needing to go through committee. These questions will be marked as optional, and at no time shall a citizen be forced or required to respond to an optional question.", and
Whereas, the Chancery has recently articulated an interpretation of existing privacy laws which allow for government use of the National Census for this effort.
Therefore, the Office of the Seneschal submits this request to the Chancery to include the following additional questions on the next census and submits same to the Ziu for approval:"
QuoteNational Skills and Social Connections Survey. The Government of Talossa presents the survey below as a part of its effort to build a voluntary inventory of citizen skills. This will give the current and future governments a way to conduct an orderly and knowledgeable search for people with the needed skills and a preexisting desire to serve. The survey also includes optional areas to make miscellaneous interests and/or hobbies known in an effort to foster social connections between citizens.
I possess the following skill(s) available for occassional and voluntary use in service to the Kingdom (Please check all that apply):
Website Maintenance
IT/Database Administration
Writing/Public Communications
Social Media Management
Accounting/Finance
Translation
Other
I am interested in connecting with other Talossans around the following shared interest(s) (Please check all that apply):
Online Gaming
Writing/Literature
Conlangs (Constructed Languages)
Archery
Heraldry
Politics
Religion/Spirituality
Music
Timebanking
Other
Uréu q'estadra så:
Breneir Tzaracomprada (Seneschal)
I think you included "Question Type" on the list of hobbies by mistake
Quote from: Ian Plätschisch on April 25, 2023, 05:44:28 AMI think you included "Question Type" on the list of hobbies by mistake
Thanks Ian. Corrected.
Quote from: Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB on February 06, 2023, 03:09:35 PMQuote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on February 06, 2023, 02:32:01 PMQuote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 06, 2023, 02:10:39 PMOkay, outgoing Attorney-General chiming in here.
Given the current section of El Lexh:
QuoteC 1.2.2.3. Any information collected during the census that would individually identify any person or persons, including their contact information, shall be withheld from the public for to protect individual privacy, consistent with Lex.D.8. The only exception is that citizens may opt to have their e-mail address shared with party leaders, pursuant to Lex.D.8.5.4. Census information shall not be released under any "freedom of information" or "government transparency" requests, notwithstanding any other provisions of el Lexhatx.
It seems to me that the bolded bit is the crux here. I haven't seen that the TNC proposal requires any such information to be released to "the public" - but to the Government, confidentially. Is the Chancery's interpretation that "the public" means anyone who's not in the Chancery?
I think this needs answering as this was my understanding as well.
My concern is not necessarily in giving the government confidential information. My concern is that the law conflicts in that giving information that can identify someone is a problem. If you all want to write a law like this, I'm not standing in your way. I'm merely pointing out, perhaps clumsily, that I don't relish the thought of someone potentially suing the Chancery because someone in the government got information that could be protected, such as identifying information. The law in question uses the word "public" so perhaps a clarification of that particular piece of law as to what "public" means? Does that mean anyone outside the Chancery, or something far less specific?
In any event, I've belabored the point and will stop giving my input on this.
Bumping re: amending the privacy law. I'm seeing myself out of politics but this may still be a potential point of action for the next Ziu.