 as I have a pizza one and Tom has shared his summer insights of that holy survey we had about 10 years of fun by word and he uploaded it on Macbooker so we can check that what he wants to know more about how we have done with the holy's as I have a pizza one for the case of 10 years and so we go to the stage three so we have a stage one and stage two the proposal and the opinion then we move on after we have to let the general collect opinions from the general public we use holy's for example as Uber then we move on to stage three reflections and this is when we follow the constitution we think so after a run or several rounds of opinion collection we have broad reports generated for example as Uber case generated by good holy's of that opinion collection and some of the facilitator and as Uber case facilitator did have a secondary study or like an interpretation of that report so we have and also at the proposal stage we have some of the documentation or paper or presentation from under the authority so based on all these materials and if the under the authority and contributor think they are ready so move on to the constitution and this of course has to be thoroughly discussed and the preparation for the constitution we think so first of all if the facilitator hasn't been involved earlier so then this is the deadline that the facilitator really needs to be engaged and we can have some kind of suggestion from the under the authority or if the contributors of many kinds of phone have some candidates then we can have a discussion about who should who will be suitable for hosting this facilitation meeting and also we need to the contributor to a meeting had to discuss with the under the authority the scope of the issue because we really need to focus on and we let at least the idea may be a little bit diverged and opinion collection so we need to try to narrow down the scope and to be more focused especially we have to host in terms of stable meetings and so we have and also need to synchronize with the facilitator so we may have a free meeting with the facilitator and a competent authority that needs to let them be on the same page to make sure that they are on the same track and the free meeting has to be at least one week prior to the consultation meeting so that one week is according to our experience and I need enough time to do the preparation and so here are some things to do some might be a little bit trivial but this is what we have to do to prepare for the consultation meeting like the rundown of the meeting and the agenda and we will also set up a registration page and we use it to fix it's a registration I think I'm right so to promote our event we will use the link of the registration page to spread the news at the event and also the rule is that only the invited speaker us guests and the registered and the participants who have made contributions we have made contributions before and can attend so this is another rule of Taiwan and we have the seating plan I see you now and also the equipment is here we will have a standover to help us do the transcript so we will make sure that we have a full documentation of the whole consultation meeting and one nice thing about transparency and documentation is that all the materials are uploaded on the internet so we have a URL for each material and it's quite easy compared with sending the actual files we only need to send out the materials for our URL we have the URL in the official letters press release on the registration page so it's quite easy and easy access for them to these materials so this is what I think about putting everything online so that everyone can check them easily so the setup so here's one of the agenda this is an NCII place, we're not from Central Intelligence so we have this standing agenda poster we'll put it at the entrance and it shows the title of the meeting, the agenda of the meeting and the flow of the consultation meeting is that we have reception first and then we let them introduce themselves and we let them, just like you guys did yesterday just let people know how we like to be called so that the standover can have your name and you will prefer your name to be documented in the transcript and then the facilitator will have a presentation about the process of the detail one and what has been done and what kind of materials or online information has been done and then the permanent authority might also have a presentation to present their activities or their position about a specific topic and then we go into the interactive discussion and this is the highlight of the consultation meeting and the facilitator will control the flow of conversation throughout the whole meeting and then after, based on these discussions the facilitator will also come to an end and draw the conclusion so this is the example of our meeting floor and this is just like a side story of the NCI case because we not only have the sitting agenda but we also have the banner just to put it behind the facilitator so the facilitator will be sitting at the bottom of the U-shape and then so this will be set in live stream so when the camera points at the facilitator the banner will be shown behind the facilitator but in the NCI case because this is the first version the right one is the first version and there's the second version so do you see... yes? the icon the icon in this one? yes, exactly so the first version also has the design of this banner and the first version so apparently the facilitator represents a male as in a predator and the big male as in a vixen and this just not right in terms of gender so we change it into older purple which might be more gender neutral but this is just a side story how we should be more careful about our design of the materials or the decoration materials for the meeting so here's the layout of the meeting room so this is the future space like now you are all sitting at the U-shape so the facilitator will be sitting here so that will be where Audrey will sit so here is the document right and the professor and here is the sign of the free and the business or the private sector and also a group of online participants so now we show the person but they can choose to stand on this or they can also show their identity and they choose to and then we'll pose their comments on the slide out later as an experiment to show so this is the sitting plan and it's quite interesting because it's been set up as a U-shape so that you can see which other space is very facial expression so that people get to see each other and the rules are on-site restriction is not welcome so as I said we only send out application letters and we only welcome those we present, we welcome those who have contributed before to be present at the consolidation but if they haven't contributed before then they can still watch live stream video and post their own comments and one of the mission of the cylinder is that you or she has to bring in insightful and valuable opinions from the online chapter so that this is where and when the physical and virtual space sort of makes together so this is a video group called Play as a Channel between physical and virtual and the method this is just one of facilitation style that we can carry we can use this called focus conversation method also known as ORID or representing objective ORID is reflective I isn't primitive I'm doing a decision so objective is facts and data so here's an example that VTOWER is a project so it's a fact and it's objective and I think VTOWER is a great project so it becomes an emotional appealing so reflective one and VTOWER is a project that expands that's like an opinion or value so it's interpretive and decision also has 10 decisions and I hope that's what has happened that we concluded that VTOWER expands within a month so people might express different kinds of opinions feedbacks, comments, ideas all sorts of statements and this is just a suggestion that we can try to categorize these a variety of statements into these four categories to help you think more objectively so ORID as I said it's just a recommendation approach to help the facilitator set up to hold a natural ground and to set a neutral ground to set a neutral mindset and there are some statements that are translated into English in the TI case I don't think we have that much of time but so it needs some practice to for example like this, the shorter one the legislation can serve the purpose of telling people this is an apple pie so this can be categorized as interpretive so it's kind of a key in so this is just an example to show you so after all these statements we need other words to show us the art of facilitation so after several rounds of discussion we need to try to find a way to reach more consensus we need to try to locate where the growth consensus is and so this is an example from this in the I case so we can move on to so we have so many levels green and blue are very popular colors so it's part of those we can hire a scholar we can hire a scholar again the budget for what we're going to do is really just go playing because there is no three weeks worth of post data to work with so this is mostly just to get to the feeling of a consultation meeting this is not a real consultation meeting but I mean more seriously speaking but in the beginning of a consultation meeting what we always do is we first honor well then the nation and the lands that we have but also honor to pose conversation that has preceded before so we always open whatever consultation that we have online and acknowledge the civil society members who took their time to participate online and give us valuable contributions so that you're invited here today if it's to please to elaborate on your ideas online and then also honor whatever groups that has been formed because we will not actually go into the divisive comments we agree to only vote our agenda to the consensus statements so it's important to acknowledge our differences first so that is again what facilitate that first we understand that there are nine people it is actually usually nine hundred but bear with me we understand that there are nine people that refuse that they love right sharing services they're so convenient and expensive and we understand that twelve hundred people doesn't think this way and we acknowledge this sentiment we also acknowledge the sentiments of the other group for example like Uber driver should be licensed exactly like taxi drivers or that the Uber should contribute to infrastructure payment to keep the road maintained through taxes or some methods and this is not exactly a popular sentiment although it is still over majority in the Uber loving segment so we also want to acknowledge this somewhat divisive but not entirely divisive idea and so starting by reading through the defining characteristics of the groups which used to be in real world much more polarized than this we move on to the actual consensus statements which is generated automatically by the police system so as you're feeling in the police we then also say that you know 24 people voted or 700 votes results into this shape which always let us see that there's more consensus than divisive statements and that everybody agrees on these majority issues and so we hold ourselves to the agenda of going through those consensus issues and asking the scholars especially to elaborate or to provide their input on how to move forward since these are clearly what people have all agreed with in their sentiment as important moving forward and so then as a facilitator I would then switch to the prepares lines which will highlight each one as a separate slide because this is real time generated so bear with me I'll just use this anyway which is a screenshot and so people think generally that sharing economy is a trend so the government should adapt the regulations instead of banning every sharing economy service we can see almost everybody is fine with this sentiment and that people want to know up front how much that they are charged so I would like to ask the Uber representative here whether this is actually already the case and in that role maybe the Uber people can just speak a simple yes or no question like whether this is already the case and yes it is so okay so people's feelings are acknowledged in the current operation in Uber and also people want to know and you want to make a comment I'm on the taxi you're on the taxi and the possible in our current business model okay so by the mile the mileage because we charge by time and mileage so we can't go up for the strikes yes so we understand that so the people would like to know up from like how much they might be charged so that may be an interesting conversation we'll have like if they know already the destination how can the civil service and the academics contribute to the possibility of the passenger know approximately what will be the rate when they arrive at the destination and that may be an interesting thing for the taxi operators to have as a tool for the passenger because that's what people feels like they would like to know and people feel that there needs to be regulation and accountability of vulnerable passengers and that people feel that resourcing should be better integrated in your public transit system like the existing metro system and the systems and finally there should be some safety training standards so the proceeding sequence is usually we start with the academics who look at those common sentiments usually they have weeks to do preparations and to elaborate their needs on a more holistic or more systemic or structural issue concerning those common sentiments but because this is just a mock consultation so just speak whatever that becomes on your mind and we'll ask any of those professors to share with us some insights to open the stage of the consultation so statement number 14 we could introduce some regulations that don't involve passengers but some of this comes from a more structural society able and we may be better served with some of those things on the top street rather than benefitting the support so by upstream it means to talk more about more vulnerable to some of the strong problems that pass if I hear you correctly you would think that in an education system everybody should care should learn how to work with vulnerable populations not just when they become passengers as in very mild insights thank you and so the civil society the people who presented those sentiments after hearing this analysis and the initial framing do you think that there's anything missing in this picture is there any particular point you would like to bring that's within this conversation congratulations some of the restrictions there are shields which are behind the drivers behind passengers and the opportunity to regulate the requirements for similar equipment in some other cases and the reason is to protect the drivers are there any other info from the civil society yes so just to check everybody's understanding what search pricing means okay good so anything from the civil society site before we turn over to the taxis and hoovers do you answer okay so just factual check so the cameras and the shielding protection is it part of regulation in the taxis industry for taxis yes and is it does it protect the drivers we have found that yes it does especially the shields the cameras are a newer piece we don't have any data yet to see if those have actually made any difference but for sure the shields have made it especially for our drivers it's made it a much safer environment especially during night shifts okay does Uber have anything to encourage interesting to see the stats of any incidents that are actually different between taxis and hoovers is that we have the levels of safety are pretty much the same ratio of levels between taxis and hoovers okay so that is for the for the shield suggestion but do you want do you have any regulations or do you have any trainings for the drivers to improve their own safety or to care about passengers do you give the drivers essential trainings as the people's will here obviously care about no but that would add a considerable cost we also wouldn't want to expect our drivers to retrofit by the vehicles with shields or cameras but often a lot of our drivers can go to so the main concern is the budget that would cost your partners to install these equipments what are our cameras for are they catching the droid on the traffic or the inside what were they appointed I don't know they were regulated on a promise we're not really sure why so if there's any people from the public sector knows about this camera installment requirements ok so maybe it refers to the traffic nearby and also to some degree activities in the driver's seat passenger behavior interaction with the driver are there minimum requirements of the quality of the camera or things like that in the current regulation or just any simple camera just make something else ok and how much does it cost anyway just make something ok so it's about just make something else ok right so say it's 1200 does Uber consider this to be too expensive for your clients so our driver in the leadership but actually everyone who enters Uber has made a decision so we don't really need the video because we have a way to capture who they are and the time limit needs to be come down like we have the exact same information that the camera would provide so we already structured it into a model ok so just before yes there's an online input that says the cameras are installed actually is focused on the road and not within the itself to protect the privacy anyway so that is a clarification from an online correspondent and yes Samuel please thank you for that one line I don't have to explain that anymore as I was definitely going to I'd like to just focus on the safety piece here that Uber did bring up they vastly misrepresented the amount of safety and the amount of liability that Uber currently takes upon itself the tax industry has been self-regulating all these safety concerns for quite a while and followed all the regulations that have been placed upon us Uber has gone above and beyond to make sure that any current regulations will be followed mainly because as far as their business model is concerned they're not the ones causing the damage or the problems because they can consider all of their drivers to be independent contractors in this way so a lot of the data that you have is usually when they get caught not when it's reported whereas we have systems in place to make sure that the reporting is all through on and is reported to the car would you like to elaborate a little bit more on the reporting structure that you currently have like if a passenger or a driver notices the incident that has happened yes so all of our drivers are licensed they all go through training and there is a number for each of them so we have our issues we're also rolling out panic weapons in the back of our issues and we already have that for most of our taxi drivers in the front so we have an entire system an entire group within not for any of the individual taxi companies but more for the the the independent body to set up for that to make sure that we do have reports of passengers and the drivers and any dangerous situation that's come up whereas with Uber just based on the fact that they don't consider the drivers to be employees that really really helps them dispute around the law and never address any of these issues fully other than perhaps reimbursement of rides which really helps with the trauma right so the panic buttons that you said is being rolled out for those passengers and drivers does the civil society here have any input into like whether it makes your food safe or have you had any incidents or personal experience of using the taxi service and things like that like do anyone have any personal experience to share around this design of reporting at you know escalation mechanism that taxis do anyone has any personal taxis stories to tell but they do give me a sense of security whereas the the 5 star rating that the Uber like services provide I don't find it very effective because all of the the ratings are all between 4.6 and 4.8 and it's very difficult to distinguish between a potentially bad driver but I think that maybe that system works better in the beginning when people were actually using it but now I don't think maybe if there was more incentive for passengers to rate their taxi drivers using the full breath of the system then it might work better but I don't feel like it works very well any other input from the other? Yes I guess when I'm having a taxi for a few months there's a lot to do to this match but I don't feel like I have some to do there's no such a way so I would feel more uncomfortable about the situation based in that case I just want to feel more safe in terms of so just to check my understanding you feel that the company line and the Uber Hazard app are both safer from hailing on the road that's great any other inputs from the city society? okay let's go back to the public sector assuming that you're the regulatory agency first before we go back to the regulators do anyone has any factual like people say that it's all between 4.6 and 4.8 stars and the other things that's brought up so far any factual shareings or amendments? we're an institute University of Toronto no relation to the Uber it's a big institute so one thing you just said the taxis can install the Uber can do the same with the tap on the screen which costs a lot less so something to think about there and having done some work with Uber in the past we know that they push out bank drivers from providing service as a way to create a minimum pressure service just some Uber okay yes we can say that because we license we have companies that have more transparency it's very hard for us to properly they also need we have a need to enforce those inspections and so on whereas with our company we have companies that sort of make or hide more complaints but that doesn't necessarily mean that okay and there's a follow-up question from online participants to you like is there an enforcement around after a panic button pushed how does the mechanism work and is there a follow-up after the incident is handled do you actually go back to check with the taxi company or the individual taxi driver how they resolve these issues incidents we don't have actually after you put in it's not like that information is backwards we don't really have a way of knowing if there's a factor whereas we do when we test when we make sure that we have those testing measures to ensure safety so that we can actually expect for the chance to have a test to check if the technology is not there we're not really excited right so it's just in the aggregate that you have to access to a panic button and to the clarification earlier that's how 4.6 to 4.8 stars and that's because drivers that falls below a certain threshold below four stars they are not allowed to drive with Uber anymore I think that's the clarification from the Uber Institute so is that true instead of the entities with the Uber in here so we assume that it's true this is a multi-facilitation yeah so like if they fall below four stars you're actually disqualified from driving anymore which is why we don't see three star drivers yes well it's true in Taiwan though it's true Taiwan it's true okay so just to check everybody's understanding we have clarified quite a few things about number 34 how existing safety training standards work to some degree and we also mentioned that the government has regulations for both camps and panic buttons but they are used in a practically preserving way and the government only has the aggregate numbers instead of you know follow through on individual case by case basis and we also understand that Uber says that the app itself or the phone itself carries certain identity about passengers so that if there is any conflicts and so on the passenger will be identified and it's easier to enforce to some degree to identify the person actually making the call and we also have at least one passenger saying that using the app and using the you know coming line to Taiwan taxi both actually makes them feel safer compared to hailing a street car and I think that's kind of common improvements before we move on to the ideation stage does anyone have anything that's facts or personal experience to add to our current understanding yes so that applies equally across all drivers yeah so all drivers get trainings and empowered to understand the whole situation about emission, social environment okay that's an excellent addition yes so not saying this is a good or bad thing but in that case it might be worth considering bringing those standards down or bringing everyone to the same standard when it comes to ride sharing apps I don't think just saying that our general driving and car testing abilities are great is enough when we already have happy industry doing our betterment and in the other half of the industry has no extra anything so by even higher standard do you mean that it's set by the public sector or by the union or by your association like where does this higher standard come from it just seems that if one side has been made to bring it to a higher standard for both emissions testing and driver convenience stuff then the other side should also be either brought to that same level or the current standard is relaxed a little bit if we're willing to trust the standard level of quality for all vehicles so is it a factual thing that taxi drivers currently go to a higher emission standard compared to no it's just a train is the vehicle quality as well the testing on the vehicles well it's actually it's like when a person is in a car we have science here science science okay so before we move on to ideation there's also a online question to ask the academics here did any of you with a way of comparative literature that across other countries perhaps about higher training standards the one that was just pointed out by the taxi association here was to better safety levels how is the correlation done is there any data or literature that we can consult maybe after this meeting yes yes there is okay that's great so after anything please please do provide maybe citations or the name of the papers to our collaboratively notes and they feel very interested in studying these and also contributing their views to the research study okay great so I think everybody is more or less on the same page now we can move on to ideation and so it seems to me and please correct me if I'm wrong that's the main kind of contention point here is that what people cares about safety levels is enforced at the moment differently but somewhat also effectively according to the objective feelings and evidence here and people wonder whether the safety standards that is mostly actually just training like hours of training or whatever to taxi drivers to taxi people would like to know whether they could be lowered by the idea like 50 hours instead of I don't know 100 hours I don't actually know the numbers here but for this kind of and I think that's one question for the ministries to consider I think it's an important point and the other thing is that people want to know upfront how much they might be charged which is as a taxi here is that it's difficult to do if you only know the beginning point you need to know more or less how they will be charged is that the case okay is there anything anyone here who feel that can improve this situation please raise your hand if you do oh yes yeah how do Uber actually do this I just think that's going to change cause I would look at you and ask in the city we don't right okay so do do so as I understand it Uber currently contracts the Google map to do the estimation and are you looking at something like that or are you looking at you know I don't know OpenStreetMap or anything like that so for taxi drivers do they usually have smartphones that can run this kind of app if you could introduce it so the taxi drivers have an embedded system which includes DPS but we don't usually ask our drivers to have their own so we have an integrated system that works specifically with the taxi but this sounds good enough actually all you need is the starting point and the destination point by the passenger where the passenger should use their own phone to kind of have to estimate so are you open to this idea like if there is a free of charge same service that the passengers can use so that couple with your GPS system to kind of just get an estimate that you know both the drivers and passengers know and there's a leeway of like potentially 20% more or something like that is something that you would agree with I'm not sure if this is something that's actually said in these meetings but like that would be something we're willing to use to negotiate and one thing we would want to make perfectly clear if there was some sort of regulated destination on that up front is that we as taxis are not in favor of surge pricing and this current method that we use we're not talking about surge pricing we're just talking about an estimate range and with a kind of 20% or so to protect the consumer rights so that you know both Uber and taxis don't take extra rules or I don't know whatever thing that you're doing and are these the people here generally in favor of this idea whether it's from Uber or not yes, what do you do if the Uber driver suddenly decides to agree on a flat rate with the passenger is that allowed at the moment for the Uber business model no, so take that, disqualify yeah okay so yeah, thank you very much definitely that's a different thing and does the taxi association do anything if the taxi agree on a flat rate it's up to them oh it's up to them it's less money in their pockets usually oh really if it's surge pricing a flat rate as in a Uber flat rate or maybe a higher flat rate yeah well that's a case by case basis there's a case by case basis okay it's not a good question yes that's right so it's possible to perhaps directly contact a taxi driver that you have already agreed on a flat rate beforehand but the association says that it's decided on a case by case basis whether it's a good idea or not so that's an important point yes but that's just important so they're like they're already surged okay but they are pre-agreed okay well so these two are all talking about if you already agreed on a flat rate then this doesn't matter okay so that seems like a pretty good bunch of ideas to follow through and so finally we have one last contention point which is surge pricing what would Uber like to explain a little bit about the surge price what would Uber like to explain a little bit about the surge price which the online participant says sometimes gets double or triple or whatever according to the current traffic and the algorithm they say is not very transparent about it does Uber want to explain a little bit more how surge pricing is understood by Uber in a city which changes throughout the day in terms of traffic we have to be adaptive to the expectations of our drivers as best as possible many cities are actually charging congestion which you could argue are forms of grieving so Uber is doing their most to think about the environmental costs and actually there is an environmental cost for driving at certain points of increased congestion so we're actually so yes just for respect to being very less exposed to traffic in the city one concern to record with Uber is that taxis currently are less than a few to the city drivers and companies and so that allows us to roll some of that back into maintaining and recruiting our infrastructure here in the city Uber places a burden on the public road system what should we do well drivers pay taxes as far as the car so that they are just exercising their right to use their own private vehicle on the roads which they do pay pay taxes to do so and because of income which gives them more capital to extend to Uber city as well let's go back to the topic of surge pricing was something that people clearly have strong opinions of yes as it's raining yeah and by doing that it attracts more drivers because they don't have a lot of money right so what you're saying is that if you want it's high when it's congested or it's raining or whatever and it attracts more drivers on the road which actually makes it more congested not less at that sort of point do you have anything to offer about this observation without either we are simply responding to the absolute flows of an urban environment if you want less people on the roads in certain times companies could be more flexible about the hours of the city on the road if you put up a a business system that's outside the downward hour you can increase the price and concentrate on what is that area so these are the issues that the Uber is not important or the road is systemic issues around how we operate our city okay yes I also like to say allegations of degrees and the number of periods certainly the ability of Uber drivers to regulate the surge price effectively increase the cost of the ride to a certain level of it so that they can then take advantage of that and increase the cost and I was wondering if the company would be willing to share that with the government so the government could be sure to use the Uber so I hear two main points I just want to recheck with everybody I hear Uber saying that there are multiple factors affecting surge pricing including demand whatever other situations around and it's complicated but there is of course data and evidence that you use to calculate that model and we're also hearing from the civil society that this is being less transparent than they would feel like like people would feel like shared with the public the data that people will understand how or whether people are manipulating these surge prices and whether it actually increase or decrease congestion because we can compare that data to the public data we have around the roads and around the congestion so we can know actually how the model that Uber currently uses helps or detracts from the environment so I'm sure it will also help the taxi drivers as well if you have a more complete understanding about the demand and the supply of the total driving population so this Uber agreed to such a data sharing plans with the public in aggregate of course we're not asking about individual rights but in aggregate and if not why a commercial sensitive how would you like to elaborate but you think that but do you think it would be helpful for the public to trust you more or you know all the other things that we've already checked you would consider it okay yes sir yes from the Uber instance to begin I would say that Toronto is an innovation economy and to ask a less innovative bad signal to sensitive other firms that might want to operate in the city and this is part of our economic development and the other point that I would make surge pricing is that surge pricing increases the price for drivers to respond and provide better service otherwise if you are sensitive to the price you can choose public transit or transportation or try your best to have a budget okay so do anyone have anything to add to this yes some of that pricing to the societal cost they should be paid taxes or to another to investing so yes I would just argue that the city planning is also contributing to the investment and the lines are not that complete even if you try to get on one it's pretty tough do you like how our Uber is operating with students and now people escape that second level of employment we were wondering if there was some way that we could leverage the academic production line in terms of data it's somewhat more like a particular transit and traffic data that we have which shows congestion patterns that we tried to use we could combine that data like if you could release it and open data format honestly we would have the information into a third party wasn't the Uber a student offense to study it try to come up with a better way that we could make needs and reduce congestion that would affect the profitability of the usership of our services which we are suffering from but we don't get enough money for our trust actions I would also like to show the Uber characterization that their data affects our data if the Uber is on-ride we could publish access to public health information in Canada I don't see how commercial services all of the clients release this data in all of those so just to clarify some terminology when you say sensitive you mean that it is sensitive to your competitors you will affect your profitability you don't mean that in a sense of privacy sensitivity okay that's perfect that's for the taxi association here we've discussed it a few times specifically because our business model is based on the idea of providing excellent jobs and stable jobs we call those non precarious jobs as well as helping people get around the city in a safe manner it's not about manipulating traffic or trying to find the best ways around problems or charging people more we're just about getting people to where they want to go while also providing excellent jobs for our drivers so we would be quite happy to at least de-identify data as long as it doesn't negatively impact our past business model there's someone online that said there is an open transport partnership or shared streets.io that the taxi companies around the world are using to share this data and the same person also online said to asking the scholars here that the Seattle Department of Transportation actually already worked with the Uber Seattle branch to share that data with the Seattle city government at the moment it's only in pilot in Seattle and not other North American cities but I would like to ask if first weather the academics here I think it would be a good idea to combine those to data and what kind of research that one can have on environmental and congestions and the second weather Uber thinks it's worth expanding from Seattle to Toronto so first the academics do you have input it's great so there's some inroads into this data sharing initiative and also the people can have a much more you know visual idea of how such pricing affects the environment and so on which is I think what everybody online and also here cares about so we would like to make some remarks about the timeline and our commitment that you have both with the academic community and with the wider open shared street community just your general ideas I would argue that a huge amount of the issues of congestion are sort of after the political level of the city towards the proper infrastructure and the games who will of a small minority of a very aggressive, loud driver representatives in the city cause much more of the issues that we see now than simply drivers and I wouldn't say the value to an extent of giving more data to a city that has lost but you can all predict on the other hand on the other hand on the other hand on the other hand on the other hand you also said that if you release this data lift will gain a competitive advantage so obviously it's useful to lift okay so if you lift also release this data to you does that kind of balance and things like that so what I'm hearing is that of course at a moment you're saying what you're doing in Seattle you're not currently committed to do the same with lift and the taxis in the Toronto area what I'm also hearing is that the taxi people would like to join the pilot even before Uber and Lift joins as kind of a demonstration of a viable collaboration with the city government but I also hear that people here generally feel that such a partnership once it's visible in a way that a citizen can access that maybe Uber and Lift would like to consider the degree in which that you will want to participate maybe not with all the data with a sample or things like that is there something that we can all live with like in the point of search pricing and data sharing please at least three or four sides okay so like three or four sides of the issue this sounds actually pretty good so maybe we can convene another multi-stakeholder panel specifically on data sharing after this which would be willing to attend okay alright and we're at time I'm just trying to ask anyway we're at time so thank you for participating in this consultation and we have a clear actual identity follow through and please respond to the online interactive notes with the relevant research as well as the current regulation that you have mentioned any URL and citation that will be very useful for the civil society here to develop more awareness and even activism around this kind of evidence that's shared by everybody and we'll have another data sharing agenda consultation meeting by the DOT expected maybe a month or so from now and we will all receive the email and letters about today's consensus points and thank you all for instance thank you so much for playing back to the reality now you can play as you work with with your yes in actual Uber consultation in 2015 actually we see people literally shouting at each other and like there's multiple very confrontational moments and had I sitting with the seating plan usually my facilitation style is and like quietly walk toward a person and put a hand on the shoulder and things like that but I can also do this through like voice tonal modulation which is what I did three years ago and it is the facilitator's role and we also have co-facilitators around the stage usually goes to your volunteers so they can also calm people down if needed and the idea very simply is that we let each speaker be fully listened before the next speaker speaks and if anyone want to interrupt because it's actually I usually just say I can't hear two voices at the same time I have a hearing problem so it's impossible for me to hear two voices once so we will hear someone fully and then someone else can speak exactly as how they want including the online people so that's my usual facilitation style there's a book called Dynamic Facilitation that explains this idea no not really because what people have in writing really is kind of already there because that's the poet's part and we also send if there's any written statements in the fact-finding stage we also send that to everybody so it doesn't matter because you can print everything out and it's all in everybody's printout so you don't have to read that out Uber in the actual case in 2015 did its own analysis on poet's data trying to put a different angle interpretation on things and then put on everybody's table so that they don't read that and as time go by more people learn to use that tactic so it kind of balances each other out but people don't speak to fine things because it's not everybody's table anyway as soon as a Uber institute is very popular I really wanted to use it to be paid by Uber or that would be maybe the civilian people Uber employees or the government just granted a giant thing how do you, is there any way to control people accusing others of being bought? so basically we published the background and qualification of all the attendance aside from the society of people who came here because of the merit of their statements so for these parts it's easier to handle because we publish entire credentials and things like that and for this, actually people here already earned the merit of resonating with everybody they are the people who presented the sentiments that everybody agrees with and so even if they're kind of paid by Uber, at least they're paid by Uber to present something that even the anti-Uber people agree with and so that kind of earned them the seat that's the idea yes, we do but not usually in the initial consultation meeting sometimes we identify the divisive statements and people do want to innovate on it but we don't force that through and we don't have time this time if we have two hours, we actually will have time to go through actually search pricing is already a divisive statement and usually we can handle maybe one or two divisive statements but that's only after checking the facts and feelings of the consensus statements and sometimes the most divisive statements needs his own follow-up meetings in terms of NCII there's another follow-up meeting that deals specifically about the timely removal I think of intimate images in online service providers without impacting freedom of speech in general and that is very divisive and that warrants his own meeting that may need clarification yeah, yes it does but I don't read that part loud this time because it doesn't really make sense to read that loud but yes for areas of uncertainty that are actually highlighting areas of uncertainty we do honor that in our slides but not this time because obviously yeah, and also there's also a read because I think it's a fact and agree because I don't know whether it's a fact that resonates with me and there's also two kind of two kind of disagree and I sure in the past are two kinds as well we find that the interface gets somewhat complex, you do that so there's a prototype that requires two tabs and the second tab is optional but we can get into a lot of details but we tested a lot of Uber interfaces so this one is of course not the final one but it's open source anyway so feel free to implement things and the translation thing is actually new so that people from different cultures and different languages they can automatically translate each other's sentences that's also new and so yeah the Uber consultation actually started one week before we realized we need a mobile interface a responsible interface for Polis which used to be desktop only and so we ran for like four days or four days and then we worked with Colin and Tim, Chris and so on on the mobile interface and wrote out the mobile interface because we realized there was drivers around mobile so because it's open source technology anytime you feel that you want a different input modality or things like that you can do that and there's a bunch of people in Brazil or something that use Slackbot actually to interact with Polis and not at all through the web which allows for more conversational approaches. I don't have a lot of details but it's very customizable right so usually we abstract to common values that's actually the only thing I've done so far doing the facilitation to abstract to the values that people all care about without specifying over specific solutions but if there is a clear division then I make sure to acknowledge both sides are important. The both sides are born out of authentic feelings about feeling something that is important and it's important to acknowledge both sides before moving on with the abstraction otherwise people feel that I am just watering them or making people's voice minuscule or unbut and so basically even if they get heated or angry like in the time zone consultation or collaborative meeting in the PO system it's important to fully hear their positions before moving on to abstraction so again to fully hear it I think is more difficult when things get divisive because you have to mentally absorb most of the attacks and making sure that attacks is always to the facilitator and not to anybody else so that sometime I have to physically stand between the two sides that are abusing each other verbally and so to make sure that any negative energy is directly to our me personally and not to the other side and then I turn to the other side to make them fully heard. They're not to interrupt each other I will repeat what I've heard in an emotionally neutral way as I did and then people are asked to respond to those points and not the originally charged points yeah we usually have co-facilitators that's our main way of capacity building you used to be that mentor Jacqueline Tsai is sitting on my site when I was still her understudy and I do the facilitation but I'm not at all an expert in law and regulations at that time in public administration so she would just whisper to me like what's the relevant code what's the relevant regulation for the person to call at this point so I'm like life coached by Jacqueline and then when I become the minister and for example we have you know facilitating for the social enterprise she is a social entrepreneur herself but she's the last burst in the dynamic involved in the public sector's view on impact investment pay for success and things like that as she facilitates the meeting and so this kind of pair of facilitation I think really is the only way aside from just keep playing back ebios and challenge myself to do better it's almost like mentorship so far that's the way we do capacity building and in the pre-meetings we actually do mocks like this to prepare for the worst and we do the same for PO meetings also for PO meetings sometimes when we go to a more strange area like the one about the remote island of the Dongsha island nobody knows anything about Dongsha island when the request came in for facilitation so we stay in Baoxiong the night before and people simulated just like the role playing all the different sizes of things and just use publicly useful information and prepare for the worst like just verbally amplify the messages and so on and so that even if the things get heated the next day actually the rehearsal is more heated so the facilitator is mentally shielded from the attacks from the real stakeholders and so far that has also worked really well and so we are almost in time so we have time for another few questions if there's anyone who would like to share your feelings so the answer is different from each part for the government it's very easy because as the additional minister other than the president and the premier anyone else in the government system if I send a meeting request they will come and that is the kind of finding power as the minister and the academics usually they are well respected they have published already on this very topic I was very eager to share their research our main problem of course is to rehearse with them a little bit to speak in lay persons language we have to do pre-interviews to make sure that they don't use overly technical knowledge that people are not common knowledge and things like that but usually the academics are also kind of easy because once you know a few right people in the right department they will be able to suggest think tanks and so on which they refer to one another you just look at this citation and records of public journals and things like that and usually in cases like this where it's live streamed the professors are usually all very enthusiastic of sharing their research which may be very obscure so it gets them more credibility the private sector side is the most difficult sometimes people do boycott consultation meetings because they feel they are not in the pre-meetings or they feel that they want to have 24 representatives because there's one text association in each city and nobody can speak for everybody else and things like that so that needs a lot more pre-arrangement and usually we do that by inviting us to our pre-meetings so the weekly pre-meetings are the way where we figure out kind of acceptable ranges and the private sector is a acceptable ranges of how many people to come what are the main condition topics how to send a scope, how to phrase the problems neutrally and so on and we found that the food actually is the main contributor every time they come to the VTAN small hackathon there's usually pizza or really good food prepared by our chef and things like that and once they come for the food they stay for the food and they're able to linger much longer than they originally prepared and then gradually build rapport so that people can see that this is really a way for people to put down their differences and focus on the few things that people can actually improve but that usually takes easily months like five pre-meetings or pre-meetings these are very usually in the Uber case the preparation is still in three months so it does take some time so it's almost six second nature to me now so it's all in my mind but basically it is a few key questions like do you have any personal experience to share that is one key phrasing that separates the objective part with the reflective part because when people relate about a personal experience they automatically enter into a mode where they talk about something that people can also relate to in a factual way if people keep saying I feel very strongly about this or that without divulging what the personal experience that backs this highly interpretative statements there's no way for other people to relate so in the first half of consultation what I'm doing is essentially releasing the cathartic energy of the interpretative or reflective part and try to get people to reveal the facts and their own experiences and in the case of epidemic the previous research that have done in a human understandable way that people can be on the same page of facts so periodically I will ask questions like so this is what we collectively understand of the situation of this aspect so far are people okay with it and if you are okay we understand the objective part is reached and then we start asking so how do you feel about it and so on so it is very nuanced but basically we don't in my mind I hear an interpretation that is not supported by objective factor of experience or if I hear a feeling that could require more experience then I asked facilitative questions that ask people to go back to the earlier stage and once people contribute on that stage for a sufficiently long time that I feel that people are on the same page we collectively move to the next stage so that's what happens online as well but in offline it's more specific yes is there a tension between that compromise that has been created with such care and less over time and the people involved in it with people who have not been involved who may have a non-deliberated opinion about something very much so very much so yes there is a strong tension yes so to be honest back in 2015 we're not very good at resolving the tension and we I would like to think we have improved now but in 2015 the VTEL Uber deliberation suffered from three things the first thing is that we did not involve people in the south in Taiwan mostly because Uber is not operating there at the moment but taxi associations there feel excluded because afterwards after we reached the consultation and ratified it like everything Uber would be able to legally operate in southern Taiwan as well because well they're ratified right but then the southern Taiwan Texas feel very angry because they've never been brought to the table at all right and so that is one shortcoming that we now work through regional innovation and tours and so on to remedy that so that's the first thing the second thing is that we involved at that time only national but not municipal civil servants and so the municipal civil servants feel also excluded because they have to basically implement whatever consensus reached by the national ministries and it's pretty good consensus but they don't feel that way so the different levels national and municipalities the tension is I would argue actually higher than the southern taxi companies and that is why the participation officer in Taiwan and other municipalities is very important because we didn't have a direct methodological transfer and report between the two levels but at that moment again in the cities like Haoyuan and New Taipei city and so on they are not exactly 100% happy with this centralized way of policy making that involved their constituents but without the career public servants and the third thing is that because it's done with zero volunteers at the ministry of cyberspace at that time and a lot of civil servants with double S5 zero participants the knowhow is not transferred there's no devolution into the township city as well as agency level it is all central administration ministry level people that knows how to run this process and so when people see that it's really working after World War in quite a few cases sometimes you know the individual agencies the directors start asking them hey the veto method really works why don't we run the veto method on such and such and they would say we have no idea how to run it and the same for the municipalities as well so it creates kind of another tension like we say veto works so well but then it works on so few cases and the reason why is that again the knowhow is not evolved the capacity building in 2015 is essentially what we say in information science in Oracle right or a plug-in that just magically works but nobody other than the central administration knows how it works and so we just buy again we think it's very important to do capacity building as soon as possible after 2015 because we also see that creates a lot of tension of the so-called popularity and success of the Taiwan and the reality that most down-to-earth cases people just don't know how to use this knowledge at all so there is a tension there as well so yeah or we can take an early break maybe we can take an early break ok so yeah so thank you for participating in this consultation and then we'll move on to the stage 4 in 3.5