Update on OGP...

[Harvey Low]

The 2012 Open Government Partnership (OGP) Meeting in Brazil is now sadly over - or rather it's just the beginning!  First let me apologize for being "quiet" during the week. I am not a veteran blogger or tweeter since these social media activities have been traditionally restricted where I work in my "day job" as a civil servant. I am therefore belatedly providing you with a brief update on the planning that led up to the event, thoughts on the conference, some of my input, and some next steps.

 

 

Planning Leading up to the event...

 

Since we received the Federal Action Plan on Open Government only a few days before the meeting, there was no time for any kind of a structured response to the Federal Plan. I however had compiled phone consultation and information posted on Civicaccess into a thick set of notes which  were invaluable during the event.(Tracey managed to do a fabulous job of posting all the materials and your attachments on the CCSD OGP website with updated links on datalibre.ca).

 

The mantle of the single Canadian Civil Society (CS) panelist fell to Toby Mendel (as a result of an OGP selection process that was very unclear at that time). I was able to discuss with Toby our collective approach to a response at our Regional Session. David Eaves and Michael Gurstein were also present in the audience and I think we had some though provoking discussions that the Feds took away (more on this later in this update). Toby focused on the FOI issues. Along with the notes, Tracey and I also put together a two-pager summary of Canadian civil society resources for distribution at the event (Slide Share - http://www.slideshare.net/TraceyLauriault/ogp-ccsd-canadian-civil-society-handout).

 

On a side note, I do want you to know that I was asked at the last minute by OGP to participate in the INNOVATION VILLAGE. I initially declined as it needed to be a demo of a very specific I&T application (which is impossible in our case with all the innovation examples nationally!).  In the end I relented after further discussions with OGP (I suspect they needed more live demos at zero-hour). I had to send a placeholder deck with emphasis on the only demo I could do (our own Toronto Open Data application). But we ended up also with a much fuller deck covering as broad Civil Society examples as we could give, and cycled them on the screen during the rest of the day after my 5 minute demo on our local app - thanks Tracey. This presentation should be posted on the OGP website by now. Sorry I could not incorporate those of you that sent me info on Friday as you understand I had to pack! Theya re also here FYI - (Drop Box - http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10199052/OGP_CCSD_CivilSocietyPresentation_InnovationBoothBrazil.ppt and Slide Share - http://www.slideshare.net/TraceyLauriault/ccsd-ogp-canada-civil-society-presentation) (Presentation - Drop Box - http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10199052/Canada_InnovationVillageV3.pptx and Slide Share - http://www.slideshare.net/TraceyLauriault/ccsd-ogp-innovation-village-presentation)

 

Thoughts about the event...

 

To say the event was well attended is an understatement. There were well over 1000 people attending from as far away as Indonesia and Tanzania. What is more significant is that the number of countries in attendance (and thus embracing open government) increased from 43 to 73! Including Canada, there were 35 plans submitted, including e-petitions and other actions.

 

I have been to conferences before, but this one was different in that I sensed a lot of energy, enthusiasm, and importantly, real commitment to embrace open government from all parties. The countries were at very different stages of their national action plans, which in itself were beneficial as that permitted concrete exchange of issues, approaches, and best practices. It was not only a chance for national governments to interact with their civil society reps, but also for all parties to exchange ideas between countries.  It is a foundation to build on these plans collectively with government reps and among each other. The diverse communities of practice were well represented including stakeholders in legislation/FOI, data, technology, civic engagement, academia, information specialists, and free speech advocates. I believe that such representation is crucial for long term sustainability as OpenGov is not about any single one of these interests, but the collective contributions of all these components.

 

What I did find somewhat troubling in my opinion, is that there still seems to be somewhat of a mutually exclusive emphasis of these components as separate entities by specialists within these areas. Some feel data are more important, while other feel the priority is legislation - to me there is no distinction of importance - it is about interoperability. This could be the result of a maturing process which can only be strengthened through further such events by bringing an understanding of how all these components of interoperability fit together and contribute towards a much fuller open government model. To illustrate my point, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also warned that technology is not a magic wand, and that political will is also required. I also emhpasized the need for more "relevant" data and not just politically neutral data.   

As for our response to the Federal Action Plan, our session went well in the sense that the dialogue was productive (I spent quite a bit of time outside of sessions with all the Federal representatives, including discussions with Minister Clement). There will be more aspects of the plan released over the next few weeks, including some new commitments along with time-lines - at least that's what we were told. More on this later...

 

As for the overall reaction on the civil society side, an overall observation is the lack of time given to civil society reps, not only for the response but for presentations as well. Panels were often too large to permit only 5-7 minutes each with some speakers going over their allotted times and reducing others to accommodate. The biggest problem however, was that the whole conference suffered from severe I&T logistical issues from being off schedule by 2 hours on the first day, lack of announcements on schedule changes, no maps to room locations, some screen resolution and audio issues, and absolutely NO wifi at all on day one - not good given the emphasis on the role technology plays in all of this! I also hear that the social media feeds had issues as well.

 

The other area absent, seems to be the "municipal-NGO network" voice as this was one of my main recommendations at our regional response. We need inclusion of sub-national bi-lateral discussions and representation. The sub-national lens is crucial in its interaction with NGO sectors given the mixed service delivery systems at local and regional levels and the need for greater acknowledgment of interoperability among all sectors including private and even academia.

 

Finally, while the OGP released the Articles of Governance, but given its infancy and our discussions with the OGP Steering Committee after the last day, that my interpretation is that there is room to modify and strengthen not only the articles but the roles of some within OGP Steering Committee structure. The OGP Steering Committee took our feedback from a final session as some of us stayed on to provide it and are open to further suggestions.

 

 

Concluding…

 

So here are some of the issues that I highlighted (not in any priority):

 

1)    That there is a need to begin exploring in greater detail the challenges that beset data delivery that go beyond the simple desire for "more data". We need to begin thinking about proper database design as data providers, to permit more seamless integration between data across government departments. We also need to change the legislation to permit this to happen (recognizing of course privacy protection). For example, there is now no ability for some jurisdictions to merge their caseload client data with shelter use. This would be invaluable for better integrated service delivery as well as a richer data resource for research analysis.

2)    Expand the data to areas of accountability and transparency and have public mechanisms in place to rate or provide feedback as to what data are missing, relevancy, data quality etc.

3)    Better coordinate hackethons by marrying technology and developers with user community (e.g., health sector). The playing field is getting bigger and more complex now.

4)    Recognize that in my opinion, data must be weighed with vital service access. For example, having worked in homeless shelters myself, it is more important to get clients into beds than it is to ensure that long surveys and questions are asked before service is rendered.  This is safe to say for call reference data such as 211 which I helped set-up and now on a national advisory board to explore such data as a resource for research.

5)    Adopt strong internal record retention policies to ensure data source providers are aware of the importance of maintaining data, but OVER TIME as well. The increasing pressure for accountability can only be achieved through time series data. 

6)    Work on updating legislation on FOI and others such as Assessment Act to allow freer access to public data.

7)    Discuss with experts in Civil Society on better standardization of data. This supplements data reporting.

8)    Discuss with civil society across ALL areas of interest. Right now, there is abyss in NGO sector representation in Canada (e,.g., community health centres, food banks etc). Data must also be relevant not onto to developers, but also to clients who need those services.

9)    Increase participation of business units in Open data initiatives that should not be the sole lead of I&T sectors. The content is as important as the technology that supports it! Both are required!

10) Leverage national networks and try to bridge these networks so each area can better understand how they can operate and support each other.

 

The OGP is a very young initiative and at this rate, the momentum has started that I believe will only increase even if, in a worse case scenario there were no further conventions,  which of course I hope is not the case. Willpower eventually turns into reality. The momentum has been started that will be hard to stop. It will be a useful resource at all levels of government in efforts to adopt OpenGov principles.

 

As for next steps, we will update the web sites with any new input and send this to the Federal reps. I will also table what I learned, at future FCM and CCSD national meetings, so that we can leverage this into more data and accountability. Finally, we need to discuss the invitation from the Feds to broaden the advisory panel's representation and the opportunities for wider civil society input.  Thank you!

 

Harvey Low

Canadian Civil Society Rep,

CCSD, Community Data Program