 If we look at 20, 30 years from now, most faculty members and most students will think that open is the norm. It's been one of the most powerful things I've ever seen in terms of getting colleagues to think about their own practices and enhance what they're doing and learn about licenses. Instead of taking a textbook and trying to reverse engineer my outcomes to figure out how they're representing the textbook, I can start from my outcomes and aggregate individual OER around each outcome so that I have exactly what I want, only what I want, not more than what I want, but everything that I want as a faculty member is super empowering. It allows students to participate in generating meaningful new content that is viewed by a broader audience than just their professor. Government really needs to have a conversation with presidents across BC, presidents at colleges and universities and institutes about what does open education mean? Why is it important? Why are we taking this into effect? We've already put $2 million into the open textbook project, but that $2 million really is just seeing the advent, the beginning of what is happening in the open education movement. The days of restricting access to information, I think they're finished. I think that apart from information linked to personal activities and privacy, that there's no longer really a reason to pretend information is scarce actually when it's abundant. Openness is a lot about the humility of understanding that the person on the ground in the classroom with those students knows more about what they need than you did. It's important for faculty and institutions to get on board now so that they are part of this movement and a part of creating it rather than catching up later on.