20 Dec 2004

Wibbi…government shared with us the legal advice we paid for and have an interest in?

from Kable

News - ID advice withheld
20 December 2004

Advice to ministers on the legality of the Home Office ID card and database plans is being kept secret, according to a response under the open government code

The government has refused to release legal advice given to cabinet ministers on whether the bill to introduce ID cards contravenes human rights legislation, it emerged on 20 December 2004.

Details of a decision to keep the advice secret were revealed ahead of an expected backbench MPs’ rebellion in the House of Commons vote on the ID card scheme.

The advice covers in-depth legal arguments about the possibility of denying people access to public services and issues surrounding powers of the security services, police and authorities being able to access medical data, financial information and other personal details.

see full story

Posted by William Heath on 20/12/04 at 2:43pm
Categories

Trackbacks

Permalink

WIBBI… government didn’t just flat-out lie to us

In the debate about the Cabinet Office instructing civil servants to delete any email over 3 months old in advance of the Freedom of Information Act coming into force, the reason reported (The Times, Saturday) is for ‘good records management practice’ to stop files blocking the system, going on to say ‘It is the end of the year and our computer system is getting overloaded.’

What complete and utter nonsense! Anyone would think we were still using punched cards or paper tape.

If the state of the Government’s internal IT is such that they are unable to retain all email indefinitely in a searchable system, then their IT suppliers must be even more useless than those of us in the profession have come to believe.

To be flippant, all they would need to do is forward their email archive to the Echelon system. Or get a few GMail accounts - I have some spare invites, if they’re interested

Posted by Simon Banton on 20/12/04 at 8:19am
Categories · Across the Board

Trackbacks

Permalink

19 Dec 2004

Participatory Democracy Networks (tools for civil, public services also)

So many minds seem to be working for the same common good. Browsing to get some training on how to install a php database on a web server, I came across this very exciting news:

FOR THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE...

Participatory Democracy Networks (pdf 575Kb)
Building on the ideas presented by Roy Madron and John Jopling in their inspirational book, Gaian Democracies, this paper tentatively presents a rough concept for a piece of information architecture to facilitate participatory democracy worldwide.

Accepting that soft systems thinking is fundamental for human survival, this paper examines activity on the internet and proposes that one solid piece of open source code will revolutionise the internet like Google did, but to far greater effect.

Unfold and continue reading...

Appropiating the Internet for Social Change (pdf 647Kb)
Towards the strategic use of networked technologies by transnational civil society organizations

As civil society, we are confronted with an opportunity – to use the Internet and other emerging network technologies to support our quest for global peace and social justice. Consider that we live in a world where almost anyone located in an urban centre can share their message globally with a free blog and a few dollars spent at an Internet café. Access is not– or will not for much longer be – a major communications stumbling block for civil society organizations. The more pressing need is for civil society to learn how to appropriate the technologies that we now have access to, bending and molding them so that they can be used more strategically and politically. While we can point to examples of innovative civil society applications, most organizations have not moved much beyond e-mail and basic web sites – and they have certainly not moved on to what might be called the ‘strategic use’ of these technologies. Put simply, the tools are in our hands, but most if us have not yet decided what to build.

Augmented Social Networks (pdf 467Kb)
Building Identity and Trust into the Next Generation Internet

Could the next generation of online communications strengthen civil society by being better at connecting people to others with whom they share affinities, so they can more effectively exchange information and self-organize? Could such a system help to revitalize democracy in the 21st century? When networked personal computing was first developed, engineers concentrated on extending creativity among individuals and enhancing collaboration between a few. They did not much consider what social interaction among millions of Internet users would actually entail. It was thought that the Net’s technical architecture need not address the issues of “personal identity” and “trust,” since those matters tended to take care of themselves.

This paper proposes the creation of an Augmented Social Network (ASN) that would build identity and trust into the architecture of the Internet, in the public interest, in order to facilitate introductions between people who share affinities or complimentary capabilities across social networks. The ASN has three main objectives:

To create an Internet-wide system that enables more efficient and effective knowledge sharing between people across institutional, geographic, and social boundaries.
To establish a form of persistent online identity that supports the public commons and the values of civil society.
To enhance the ability of citizens to form relationships and self-organize around shared interests in communities of practice in order to better engage in the process of democratic governance. In effect, the ASN proposes a form of “online citizenship” for the Information Age.

Wrap up...

Posted by Not waving but drowning on 19/12/04 at 2:39am
Categories · Ideal Goverment - project

Trackbacks

Permalink

18 Dec 2004

Next deadline: 28 February 2005

Let’s cook up a plan to create an open source style feedback mechanism about public sector service quality - a wikipedia of what public services are really like, and a wibbipedia of what they should be like. JRCT is looking for projects like this so I’m going to send in an application form, and develop it using the open-source model (by which I mean i’ve put my half-baked thought on line and am open to suggestions for improvement). Version 0.1 is meant to cover -

Draft description in max 100 words
Where the idea comes from
Why it’s crucial
How we set about it
What help we need (people, resources, funding) and how we find it
Who benefits
How we know it’s working
Will the world be a better* place afterwards
What are the risks? What might stop us? How would we overcome it?
Are we done after five years? Or does it carry on?

See below for my first pass....

Unfold and continue reading...

.
Draft description in max 100 words

Public services are a vast complex machine run without an intelligent feedback mechanism. We need to bridge the gap between people who know what it’s like to give and receive these public services and those responsible for decisions about them. Project [name reqd] takes objective, structured evidence from those directly giving and receiving public services and plugs it in where it’s needed. It’s an independent, open-source census by mystery clients. All methods, software and results will be public domain under a creative commons licences

So where did the idea come from?

The idea comes from

- working on Council tax customer service delivery (analysis for councils of comprehensive nationwide service assessments) by BEM Research and Kable, June 1993, a census of service quality based on observational “mystery customer” research conducted over two days on every single council operating the council tax.

- observing “Wikipedia”, the collectively created online worldwide free encyclopedia. The content is interesting, and the editorial rules which breed shared factual recording, including dispute resolution, even more so

- submissions to the Ideal government on-line brainstorm about e-enabled public services (October to December 2004 - www.idealgovernment.com) notably from (well - certainly Nick, Stefan, Adriana, Louise, Steve J, Helen S, David...and more no doubt)

- conferences run by the Institute of Ecotechnics and a specific discussion with Mark van Thillo, chief technical officer on the Biosphere2 project about the role of feedback mechanisms in making complex systems sustainable

- discussions with Citizens Advice (formerly Nacab) about outsourcing and computerisation of public services, including a presentation at NACAB annual conference in 2002

- cool online public service stuff like UpMyStreet, TheyWorkforYou and the NOMS/GEMS idea.

Why is it crucial?

Because we’re not making sufficient progress improving public services and those at the top are too insulated from the realities faced by front line public servants in giving and the neediest among us in receiving. Also because the culture of spin and targets is eroding trust in government’s PR about service quality levels.

How do we set about achieving it?

1. Define aims
2. Form core project team
3. Define procedures for “observational research” (ie this is not a complaint mechanism - it’s a scientific feedback mechanism)
4. Create software engine to record observations in a retrievable structured format, with graphic outputs
5. Controlled pilot study using experienced observational researchers
6. Roll out so anyone can contribute in moderated format. ("Anyone" means any person with direct personal experience of UK public services, who can describe their experience according to our rules and transmit or have it transmitted to our on-line service. Digital divide issues might mean we need to accept forms and key them in, but this would require resource)
7. Communications plan to deliver results to contributors, commentators, and those in a position to make public services better

What help do we need (people, resources, funding) and how do we find it?

1. One day a quarter senior management consultancy to advise on process and troubleshoot
2. Design - select by competitive tender
3. Software expertise - co-operative open source model, with generous reimbursement of expenses
4. Research expertise - we request this from Kable and from NOP which is now UK market leader in observational research (having acquired BEM in 199?)
5. Media relations - select by competitive tender
but above all…
6. Contributions from people who experience public services and
7. Considerate attention from those who can put this evidence to good effect

Who benefits?

1. Recipients of public services who find it hard to articulate their needs and get their requirements taken seriously
2. Welfare helpers and advisers
3. Taxpayers
4. Those trying to form rational evidence-based policies

How do we know it’s working?

0. Credible plan, research rules, software engine, design
1. Successful pilot
2. Wider take up by volunteer mystery clients
3. Coherent lessons and a body of useful evidence
4. Reaction to the evidence in media
5. Successful engagement with service deliery organisations
6. Better policies, improved services, better feedback

Will the world be a better* place afterwards?

If accurate, observed and objective feedback leads directly to service improvement and more effective use of tax then this delivers social justice. At the very least there are many situations where one feels far better for having the chance to record just how it is one has been treated, and how it is one would wish to have been treated.

What are the risks? What might stop us? How would we overcome it?

The work may be controversial, and results will have to be delivered in a measured and considered way. What is important is the longer term effect of our feedback loop, rather than any initial shocks and surprises. It will require firm independence coupled with resolutely cheerful optimism that services can be improved. if those at the top can be helped to understand the realities at the giving and receiving end.

It might be unpopular with government. In my experience public servants can take the view that it is an outrage to report on their activity without their permission. However, I think this view can be politly rebuffed as long as methodology and objectivity can be shown, and one has no axe to grind other than improving service quality, securing better value or lower administrative costs, and restoring trust in the state and in public services.

It might attract substandard, frivolous input - the online equivalent of junk mail or graffiti ie spam or actionable or insulting language. It will need an on-line editorial process to deal with this (eg moderated input) but peak workloads might present a challenge.

All the risks of systems design (overload, scalability, backup) would need to be addressed.

Are we done after five years? Or does it carry on?

The work of setting it up will be done within 18 months. Whether or not it remains vital, capturing general imagination and interest and commanding the respect of those in charge of public service delivery will be a question of how well it is designed, presented and whether it is seen to be having any effect. We may have dropped the idea in that timeframe. But even if it is as successful as we could hope it seems unlikely that public service would have improved to the extent we would want to see within that timeframe.

*Better is defined in this context by JRCT as more just and more peaceful

Wrap up...

Posted by William Heath on 18/12/04 at 11:18pm
Categories

Trackbacks

Permalink

Annoying words to avoid

By the third talk at the IPPR event the other day I started a “Fed up list” of expressions that I never want to hear again in the context of improving public services.

silos
targets
things being targetted
sending out messages
miss the boat
UK leading the world (eg in CCTV)
gold-standard (as in ID systems)
actually
frameworks
initiatives
initiativitis
solution
security.

If anyone speaks of CRM (let alone “citizen relationship management") just shun them. As Chris Yapp says - in future the customer manages the relationship - CMR.

Glad of any further suggestions.

I’m getting pretty wary of this word “progressive”. In the context “progressive rock” its pretty harmless. We seem to put up with it when it means “give us your money to spend on civil service pensions”. But now it’s starting to mean “We’re allowed detention without trial and building centralised registers of biometrics, DNA, whatever without you saying it’s uncool”. It seems to involve a progression towards something rather sinister.

With no opposition and Richard Allan not standing for re-election it looks like we’ll all have to take up yogic flying.

I’m also fed up with people proposing different meanings of the “e” prefix in e-government (you know, efficient, effective, etc). As for making drug-related jokes about “e”, dont people realise the Home Office has made such jokes illegal? The war on drugs is no laughing matter. Public servants of all people should know better.

Wouldn’t it be better if...
...we could state what is happening in public services and what we want to achieve in plain English.

Posted by William Heath on 18/12/04 at 4:28pm
Categories

Trackbacks

Permalink

17 Dec 2004

Better government and e-government - Tom calls for a stiff upper e-lip

Some of the recent posts seem a little discouraged about e-Government, lamenting the proliferation of databases, the quagmire of e-Voting, etc. Time for some Xmas cheer, I think.

e-Government should be fading from the national agenda at this point in time. Not because it doesn’t work, but because it does. (Think Pat Morita in The Karate Kid--"Properly executed, there is no defense"). People do not brag inordinately about the presence of telephones within their organisation. It’s sort of taken for granted, and so should be the presence and utilisation of information and communications technologies to improve and extend the performance of government functions. We have reached the point in the five-year adoption cycle where many systems should be showing signs of improved productivity and organisational performance--and in fact, we are seeing this. Pity it won’t be counted correctly for a couple of years, but it’s happening.

Proponents of e-Government as a ‘philosophy’ of changing the nature of government have made a couple of mistakes that are extremely typical of movement politics. First, we acted like engineers, in that we looked at what the technology could do before we actually asked people what they wanted. Second, we tried to use our new technologies to address areas of government that were not broken--such as voting, a system that has worked well for a couple of centuries.

However, the passion for improving government survives, and the knowledge that modern technology can be used to do it is not going to fade. Maybe we should focus our thinking on where the problems lie within government first… and seeing how combining different technological processes can solve the real problems.

My nomination of the day is means testing. Why is it tough? Why does the government of the day use it as a bottleneck to minimise and delay the redistribution of income that all have agreed should happen? Why isn’t means testing integrated across all services? Why should citizens submit to the embarrassing--indeed, often humiliating--process more than once? Given that any of the big systems integrators could design and roll out a solution that would answer all of my questions in less than a year, why doesn’t the Ideal Government community collaborate on developing user requirements and getting one or two of the SI’s to draw up a statement of interest that could initiate movement within government, instead of being reactive. Could set a trend…

Posted by Tom Fuller on 17/12/04 at 10:54am
Categories

Trackbacks

Permalink

16 Dec 2004

ID Cards: Why Are We Here (Again)?

In the 1980s, the then Australian Labor Government proposed the “Australia Card” ID scheme so as to “address the problems of organized crime, tax evasion, welfare fraud and immigration.”

Initially, there was widespread support from the media, politicians and Australians. However, when the details, likely costs and implications became clearer, increasing problems emerged. Politicians and the media raised questions, public support fell away and the scheme was dropped.

Twenty years later, the UK Labour Government wants to introduce a similar scheme, for very similar “reasons.”

Unfold and continue reading...

Posted by Richard S on 16/12/04 at 5:33pm
Categories

Trackbacks

Permalink

Read this lot before Monday’s debate

Kim Cameron has posted up an identity and privacy reading list from Stefan Brands. See below. How many MPs speaking in Monday’s identity systems debate won’t even know the title of a single one of these books/papers?

The other essential read before Monday is the Information Commissioner’s position. Shame on anyone who claims to understand the issues without taking this on board.

Unfold and continue reading...

Posted by William Heath on 16/12/04 at 1:39pm
Categories

Trackbacks

Permalink

15 Dec 2004

Dance of the pygmies

One can barely imagine the rejoicing among the so-called intellectual pygmies (who by happy coincidence had planned a big party tonight anyway) on the news about David Blunket’s resignation

Wouldnt it be great if his replacement, Charles ”RIP” Clarke, decided to transform one disastrous policy rather than introduce yet another...Fat chance, I reckon.

Posted by William Heath on 15/12/04 at 10:33pm
Categories · Identity

Trackbacks

Permalink

Policy day at Millbank

Interesting session at the IPPR today - is e-government better government? Scepticism has set in and it’s a question to ask.

Richard Allan MP and freelance thinker Chris Yapp (on the Microsoft payroll) were splendid. We heard about Transport Direct. We were all trying to chip ideas into Will Davies’ IPPR digital manifesto work. I reported on ideal government.

Minister Ruth Kelly revealed we may soon be able to pay our car tax via insurance companies. DVLA is thinking about it, apparently. (A friend recently asked me how long-term e-government watchers retained the will to live. I know what she means).

Posted by William Heath on 15/12/04 at 9:49pm
Categories

Trackbacks

Permalink

And another central database proposed….voters

The splendid Martyn Thomas (who gave such telling evidence to the Home Affairs Select committee) points out an enquiry into future e-voting.

It’s really into voter registration, and the desirability and security of a national electoral register. “Yet Another National Database”, he says with a :-(

Posted by William Heath on 15/12/04 at 9:42pm
Categories

Trackbacks

Permalink

13 Dec 2004

Game Over, They’ve Won!

According to a Government press release, all will be well in time for the 2005 deadline.

Also, apparently the take-up of UK e-Government services so far has been good.

Posted by Richard S on 13/12/04 at 8:21pm
Categories · Ideal Goverment - project

Trackbacks

Permalink

Identity, authentication, authorisation and awareness

A decent discussion on identity, authentication, authorisation and awareness between Carl Ellison and Bob Blakley. We need to get literate on all this stuff if we’re to tell government what we want.

Posted by William Heath on 13/12/04 at 6:50pm
Categories

Trackbacks

Permalink

Chief privacy officers and Epic’s fair information usage.

Elsewhere in the blogosphere the ever-stimulating White Rose makes reference to Wired’s article on US public-sector opportunities for chief privacy officers.

Will the UK see advertisements for public sector chief privacy officers? If so they’d better specify “no experience required” since as far as we know nobody has any.

White Rose points also to another good statement of user requirements for e-enabled public services - EPIC’s code of fair information practice.

The Code of Fair Information Practices is based on five principles:

There must be no personal data record-keeping systems whose very existence is secret.

There must be a way for a person to find out what information about the person is in a record and how it is used.

There must be a way for a person to prevent information about the person that was obtained for one purpose from being used or made available for other purposes without the person’s consent.

There must be a way for a person to correct or amend a record of identifiable information about the person.

Any organization creating, maintaining, using, or disseminating records of identifiable personal data must assure the reliability of the data for their intended use and must take precautions to prevent misuses of the data.

Looks to me like another excellent wibbi - what do you reckon?

Posted by William Heath on 13/12/04 at 5:17pm
Categories

Trackbacks

Permalink

12 Dec 2004

Visions of e-enabled government…

The JRCT is looking for people with vision of a just and better world. They cite a Japanese proverb:

Vision without action is daydream.
Action without vision is nightmare.

Posted by William Heath on 12/12/04 at 4:24pm
Categories

Trackbacks

Permalink

Page 91 of 101 pages « First < 89 90 91 92 93 > Last »

Ideal Government

Let's say what we want from e-enabled government. Let's observe government first-hand. Let's say "Wouldn't It Be Better If" (WIBBI). Become an ethnographer of bureaucracy today! It beats getting frustrated with public services.

Comment

Anyone is free to comment. Or mail with an article if you want to be an author. I'll post it up and send you a password. This whole thing is supported by Kable.

Authors

Member List

Sign up for new articles

20 Dec 2004

Wibbi…government shared with us the legal advice we paid for and have an interest in?

WIBBI… government didn’t just flat-out lie to us

19 Dec 2004

Participatory Democracy Networks (tools for civil, public services also)

18 Dec 2004

Next deadline: 28 February 2005

Annoying words to avoid

17 Dec 2004

Better government and e-government - Tom calls for a stiff upper e-lip

16 Dec 2004

ID Cards: Why Are We Here (Again)?

Read this lot before Monday’s debate

15 Dec 2004

Dance of the pygmies

Policy day at Millbank

And another central database proposed….voters

13 Dec 2004

Game Over, They’ve Won!

Identity, authentication, authorisation and awareness

Chief privacy officers and Epic’s fair information usage.

12 Dec 2004

Visions of e-enabled government…

Ideal Government

Categories

Comment

Authors

Sign up for new articles

Copyright

Designed by...

Statistics

20 Dec 2004

Wibbi…government shared with us the legal advice we paid for and have an interest in?

WIBBI… government didn’t just flat-out lie to us

19 Dec 2004

Participatory Democracy Networks (tools for civil, public services also)

18 Dec 2004

Next deadline: 28 February 2005

Annoying words to avoid

17 Dec 2004

Better government and e-government - Tom calls for a stiff upper e-lip

16 Dec 2004

ID Cards: Why Are We Here (Again)?

Read this lot before Monday’s debate

15 Dec 2004

Dance of the pygmies

Policy day at Millbank

And another central database proposed….voters

13 Dec 2004

Game Over, They’ve Won!

Identity, authentication, authorisation and awareness

Chief privacy officers and Epic’s fair information usage.

12 Dec 2004

Visions of e-enabled government…

Ideal Government

Categories

Comment

Sponsor

Authors

Sign up for new articles

Copyright

Designed by...

Statistics