Canada Y2K Reports

[Bob Olsen <bobolsen@tao.ca>]

 Two Canadian progress reports from the GLOBAL MILLENIUM FOUNDATION,
 one from August 1998 and the second from December 1998.


 http://www.globalmf.org/federal.htm

 Ottawa, August 11, 1998

 The Global Millennium Foundation released today its "Citizen's Report
 on Canadian Government Preparedness for Year 2000". This report
 reflects the status of Y2K repair projects for over fifty Canadian
 government departments and organizations.

 The Global Millennium Foundation's findings indicate that there is a
 severe lack of leadership and coordination of overall Year 2000
 efforts within government organizations and departments. There is no
 apparent successful management structure being used. There does not
 seem to be a consistent method for tracking and reporting progress of
 Y2K projects. There is an understated total cost of Y2K repairs and
 an overstated assessment percentage complete within projects.

 While other countries seem to be addressing the problem in a more
 coherent fashion, Canada could very well be losing credibility and
 status as a world leader on this issue. The lack of information that
 is being reported on Canadian government progress may be leading many
 Canadians to believe that everything is under control.  But, there
 has been little evidence to prove that this is the case.

 Canada has not released a progress report since February. There is no
 single person responsible for its y2k program. The Prime Minister has
 not mentioned the issue in public and the majority of Canadians do
 not understand the seriousness of the issue.

 The President of the United States on the other hand, has spoken out
 publicly and has announced new initiatives such as "good Samaritan"
 legislation which would promote open sharing of Year 2000 information
 and shield parties from liability claims based on the sharing of that
 information. This is an example of the kind of leadership Canada
 should demonstrate.

 The Global Millennium Foundation urges government to take control of
 this project and create a national program office, which would
 coordinate the efforts of such vital sectors such as municipalities,
 hospitals, educational institutions, hydro and telecommunications. If
 the government does not lead the way on this, Canadians will suffer
 more problems than they have ever seen before.

 "The Canadian government seems more interested in taking care of the
 Canadian government but no one seems to be taking care of Canadians',
 said Bill Syrros upon releasing the Global Millennium Foundation's
 latest report.

                          .................

 Citizen's Report on Canadian Government Preparedness for Year 2000
 August 1998

 Provided by Bill Syrros, Director of Communications

 Introduction

 From the beginning, the Canadian Federal Government was late in
 starting its year 2000 program. Its primary objective was to
 remediate y2k problems within government departments and create
 awareness in the private business sectors. This approach lacked an
 overall national focus, coordination and leadership.

 In April, the government stated that it had repaired 45% of its
 government wide mission critical systems. This represented less than
 50% of all government systems that were affected by y2k. The
 government continued to assure Canadians that everything was under
 control.

 Since then, very little information has been released to the public
 with regards to the current status of the government's Year 2000
 remediation program. The cost estimate of Y2k repair is still
 officially at $1 billion but will inevitably rise as the full extent
 of the problem becomes known. Canada's Prime Minister has yet to
 speak in public on the seriousness of the issue and there is no
 single person responsible for it's government wide Y2k program.

 The purpose of this report is to place in the public forum the
 current status of many Canadian government departments and
 organizations. The information in this report was attained through
 interviews with various government y2k project managers. The
 methodology was very simple. The following four questions were asked;

 1. What is the cost estimate of Y2k repair within your department or
    organization?
 2. How much has been spent to date?
 3. What percentage is complete?
 4. Is the concentration only on mission critical systems.

 The Global Millennium Foundation's findings are as follows;

 This report is based on responses from thirty-seven government
 departments and organizations. Overall, fifty-four departments and
 organizations were initially contacted.

 Summary of findings:

 1. There is no overall coordination or methodology that is
    consistent for tracking and reporting progress and percentages
    complete within government departments and organizations.

 2. It appears that Treasury Board is reporting incremental costs
    of Y2k repair rather than actual costs.

 3. Based on our current findings, Treasury Board has understated
    the total cost of y2k for the Canadian government.

 4. Y2k Project Managers are reporting to both internal department
    authorities and the Treasury Board.  Each report represents
    different conclusions.

 5. Treasury Board's percentage complete does not accurately reflect
    the true percentage complete of the department. It is based on
    the current status of work being done on government wide mission
    critical systems, which represents roughly half of the entire
    project.

 6. Treasury Board is using a methodology for tracking and reporting
    based heavily on testing that has been completed and work in
    progress. Percentage complete should only reflect what is fixed,
    tested and operating in a Year 2000 environment. (assuming that
    hydro and telecommunications are operating).

 7. Few departments or organizations have an accurate estimation of
    y2k project costs.

 8. Departments are not being fully forthcoming with the information
    regarding their y2k status. Some departments are withholding
    status information and claiming that Treasury Board speaks on
    their behalf.

 9. Some departments and organizations are declaring that they do
    not have a y2k project. They are calling their work general
    upgrading, infrastructure upgrading, or "evergreening".

 10. Y2k costs for crown corporations are not included in the cost
     estimate for the department that it is responsible to.

 11. There are significant y2k project differences between
     centralized and decentralized government departments.

 12. In some cases, departments and organizations are not including
     the human resource factor in the final cost estimate of y2k
     repair.

 13. No complete estimate of final testing requirements exists
     within departments and organizations.

  List of Government Departments and Organizations included in this
  Report
   .... deleted .....

  Government Departments Y2k Estimate ($millions)
   ..... deleted .....




December 1998 Report...............................................

http://www.globalmf.org/december98.htm

  GLOBAL MILLENIUM FOUNDATION

  Year 2000 Monthly Status Report For CANADA   December, 1998

  "Do not gamble with our children's future".

  Introduction.........

  The storm is about to begin.

  The Problem.........

 A worldwide technology problem is spreading faster than we can fix
 it (components continue to be manufactured that will not work
 correctly when the century changes). Only a few understand the full
 extent of the danger. Time has run out to fix everything. It is
 still possible to focus all efforts on the most essential areas.

 The Approach...........

 We cannot fix what we do not understand. We need more information
 so that key trouble spots can be pinpointed. Anyone who has
 attempted to fix the problem in a large organization understands
 the need for a coordinated attack through a central group called
 a program office.

 Next Steps.........

 Country level program offices need to be created to coordinate
 national solutions. This allows for consistent strategies to avoid
 duplication of effort and maximize progress. A global tracking and
 reporting mechanism will provide the big picture. A National
 Program Office is mandatory for any country that expects to be
 successful in dealing with this crisis.

 Key Issue.........

 Far too many business and government leaders still deny the
 existence of a serious threat. One of the primary reasons behind
 this appears to be the trend to disclose limited information based
 on in house legal advice.  Individual organizations fully recognize
 they have a major problem. If full disclosure could be encouraged,
 many business leaders would have to accept the problem as very
 serious. Instead of using the public relations people to spin a
 positive "story", more effort needs to be expended on accurate
 reporting using simple metrics that can be easily compared. Look
 at the total Y2K budget and the total spent, then calculate a
 percentage of work completed. There is some recent evidence that
 more sharing is starting to happen.

 Global View.........

 The current status at the global level remains poor. Many other
 topics such as weakening national economies, occupy the world's
 attention. Note that the U.S. will be the key to the global
 solution. The probability of many national economies experiencing
 significant stress during the year 2000 is very high. The
 probability of a global recession in the year 2000 based on the
 current progress, is 100%. Good progress was made during May in
 raising overall awareness at the global level especially at the G8
 conference. Unfortunately, no specific action plans were developed.
 President Clinton has now spoken out on this issue. The World Bank
 is recommending a national level coordination. Japan and the U.S.
 have agreed to cooperate. The Economist published an excellent
 story and summary of the lack of progress in Europe. Several new
 national programs have been announced but little evidence of the
 mandatory tracking and reporting currently exists. A national
 program needs to be shared with the public and this is most easily
 accomplished through a web site. At least three dozen countries
 now have national programs and there are some early signals that
 this may be coming for the U.S. Recent reports from Cap Gemini and
 Gartner Group demonstrate the growing recognition of the global
 threat. The United Nations National Y2K Coordinators Meeting of
 Dec. 11, 1998 resulted in 120 countries being represented. Details
 can be found at: http://www.un.org/members/yr2000/

 Score Card: Total Countries: 200+ National Program Offices: 39+

 National View..........

 The Canadian National Program Office will attempt to coordinate the
 solution across the country by establishing consistent strategies,
 reporting progress, facilitating focus groups, and providing overall
 leadership. Overall progress is still estimated to be less than 50%.
 Similar overall progress metrics were released in the U.S. that show
 American Industry with at least 50% remaining to be completed. One
 of the major issues is the lack of status information and the
 inability to properly anticipate key bottlenecks such as resource
 shortages and excessive change volumes.

 Federal Government.........

 The Canadian Federal Government was late in starting their year 2000
 program and based on the Auditor General Reports, they have major
 problems to overcome.  Note that only mission critical systems are
 being addressed which represents less than 50% of the total. The
 remainder will have to be corrected after the end of 1999. During
 April, announcements were made that the year 2000 would become the
 top priority, a change freeze would be implemented, and the Prime
 Minister will be sending letters to each Minister in the government
 reminding them that they are responsible to ensure the work is
 completed. Recent evidence indicates that significant discrepancies
 exist in the official progress reports and the actual work completed.
 There is no overall leadership, there is no consistent methodology,
 there is no accountability, and they are not using the best practice
 management model. The Task Force 2000 has been disbanded. The
 official status report indicates 64% of the effort has been
 completed. The Canadian military have initiated contingency planning
 and have started a national risk assessment. Another Auditor General
 report, released in early December, confirms the lack of progress.

 Provincial Governments..........

 The Provincial Governments were late in starting their year 2000
 programs and they have major problems to overcome. The smaller
 Provinces are in better shape. Coordinating efforts between and
 within the provinces will be a major challenge. Nova Scotia has
 allocated 65 million, Alberta announced 100 million and Ontario 300
 million for health care year 2000 correction. Quebec announced 500
 million for social and health services.  Note that very little of
 this money has been spent. No provincial government has announced
 the importance of addressing this problem as a key issue. Ontario
 represents the largest problem with an estimated $400 million
 problem. The other provinces are estimated as follows:
 Quebec-250,B.C.-200,Alberta-100,Manitoba-30, Saskatchewan-30,New
 Brunswick-15, Nova Scotia-22, Newfoundland-5, PEI-5. Note that all
 amounts are in millions of dollars. Recent auditor general reports
 confirm that the three of the largest provinces, Ontario, Alberta
 and Quebec, are not in good shape. Only five provinces have created
 web sites for Year 2000 information. The web site for Nova Scotia
 is an excellent example of progress reporting and the only province
 to provide meaningful progress information.

 Infrastructure...........

 A coordinated approach is needed for hydro, telecommunications,
 health care and municipalities. The larger provincial governments
 are going to be experiencing difficulty in correcting their own
 year 2000 problems. It is difficult to determine where the
 coordination for the various infrastructure elements will come
 from. Each province needs to create a regional program office that
 would coordinate local year 2000 focus groups and share experiences
 with other regional program offices across the country. Nova Scotia
 power is operating some electrical power generating plants with a
 date beyond the end of 1999.

 Largest Employers..........

 Little in the way of meaningful progress information is available
 through official channels. The continuing high rate of merger
 activity is a major concern.

 Banking Industry..........

 The Canadian Banking Industry represents one of the most advanced
 year 2000 solutions in the world and many of their solutions can
 be reused by others that are just starting. In the interest of
 sharing this knowledge, the Canadian Banking Industry should be
 hosting a world wide summit on year 2000 for other bankers.

 Conclusion: We are still losing this race against the clock.

 Sector Status........

 The following percentages represent the Global Millennium
 Foundation view of the amount of effort completed. The number in
 brackets represents the progress that is being reported. Lack of
 brackets indicates no consolidated progress is being reported
 through official channels.

  Federal Government      35-40% (45-65%)

  Provincial Government 25-30%

  Telephone Industry      30-35%  (BCE employee reports 50% progress)

  Hydro          30-35% (Ontario Hydro claims to be Y2K compliant)

  Municipalities               15-20% (Recent surveys confirm)

  Healthcare                    10-15%

  Largest Employers        30-35%

  Financial Industry       50-55%


  Standards/guidelines............

 The following items are default standards for all year 2000
 activities.  Despite imperfections, they represent the opportunity
 to end debate and move to action. The most effective management
 model requires that every manager be held accountable for their
 department's Year 2000 problem. A consistent process must be used
 in order to ensure status reports are similar and easy to compare.
 Progress information should be shared with the public to help avoid
 a panic.

 1-Definition of compliance: Use the British standard below:

  No value for current date will cause any interruption in operation.

  Date-based functionality must behave consistently for dates prior
  to, during, and after the year 2000.

  In all interfaces and data storage, the century in any date must
  be specified either explicitly, or by unambiguous algorithms or
  inferencing rules.

  Year 2000 must be recognized as a leap year.

 2-Interfaces: No change to date formats in any internal or external
  interfaces. Anyone initiating a change to a date format is liable
  for any downstream costs to accommodate the change.

 3-Metrics: Start reporting two numbers each month. Total spent to
   date and total planned to correct the problem. Inability to
   produce these numbers is the first sign of a very serious problem.

 4-Building Facilities: Leave this category for later. Early
   indications suggest few issues and the current leaders on this
   topic will share their information.

 5-Miscellaneous: Items such as photocopiers, Fax, pager, cell phone
   are not critical. Ignore them and focus on the more important
   areas.

 6-Windowing: Large organizations have insufficient time remaining
   to consider a date expansion strategy. Use a standard date
   routine that can be referenced by all programs to reduce the
   effort by up to 50%.

 7-Embedded Systems: This category of Year 2000 problem is not the
   impossible challenge that some would have us believe. Look to
   the people currently responsible for managing equipment, to use
   common sense and basic management principles to determine what
   needs to be fixed and what can be ignored.



   .............................................
   Bob Olsen, Toronto            bobolsen@tao.ca
   .............................................