[Okfn-irl] Proposal on a process to advance the OGP Project
Shawn Larsen Day
day.shawn at gmail.com
Thu Nov 21 16:37:23 UTC 2013
Dear Nat,
Just to echo - what you have assembled is a very logically expressed and a practical approach to moving forward from where we find ourselves. Thanks for putting your back into it and defining it so extensively. The core group is essential to keep it moving building from the sentiments and objectives defined through the past process. The only aspect I feel compelled to add is to reiterate the concept of developing a process through this so that it remains ongoing and not a one off process to meet a single defined milestone.
Look forward to some continuing discussion tonight at the ODIrl Meetup.
All the best and Thanks,
Shawn
On 21 Nov 2013, at 14:51, Jane Suiter <jane.suiter at dcu.ie> wrote:
> Hi Nat,
>
> That all sounds eminently sensible to me. large groups simply dont work very well and I like that it will be so open. Also important not to get too hung up on one issue no matter how much some of us individually think it important. Well done.
> Best,
> Jane
>
>
> On 21 November 2013 08:36, Nat O'Connor <noconnor at tascnet.ie> wrote:
> What follows is a letter to everyone who participated in the civil society meeting with Government officials on 25th October, to anyone who attended the OGP consultations run by Transparency Ireland and to anyone interested in promoting more open government in Ireland – please feel free to circulate. (I have send this email to the above lists, also BCC’d to 43 individual email addresses I have from our discussions of OGP to date)
>
>
>
> Please let me know if you think this is (or isn’t) a good proposal to send to the Government Reform Unit.
>
>
>
>
>
> At the meeting (25th October) of civil society activists with William Beausang and officials from the Government Reform Unit at DPER, it was suggested that we propose a process to them to inform their own submission to the Government meeting of late November. I’m conscious that time is pressing on this.
>
>
>
> Two significant things have occurred subsequently to the October meeting. Firstly, some civil society people attended the two-day global Open Government Partnership summit in London (31st Oct/1st Nov), which was preceded for those who could attend by civil society meetings and open data meetings earlier in the week. Secondly, there has been a major public dispute about FOI fees and a real risk that the amended FOI Act will increase the barriers to FOI usage through higher costs associated with non-personal FOI requests, which runs counter to the goals of the OGP.
>
>
>
> The summit provided lots of useful information and examples of how OGP is working in other countries, the pitfalls as well as the success stories. There is a vibrant international movement for OGP – but one limited by resources and still in its fragile early stages.
>
>
>
> In relation to FOI up-front fees, I believe these should be abolished.
>
>
>
> But OGP is about more than FOI, and it is important that Ireland puts in place a robust process for civil society engagement with Government about our first OGP Action Plan and its implementation (and annual renewal). This process should be solid enough to permit us to have a serious debate with Government about the merits and demerits of FOI fees, without allowing this issue to block further progress on the other 70 proposed actions from the OGP consultancy process.
>
>
>
> At our discussion at the October meeting, I recall that a potential impasse was identified. Civil society has put forward 71 recommended actions; however the Government has yet to put forward their own list of proposed actions, derived from the Programme for Government and from civil service suggestions from the relevant Departments. We risk getting bogged down if either side wants to stick to their preferred list and go through each item one after the other in exhaustive detail.
>
>
>
> William Beausang noted that the national OGP Action Plans are meant to be short documents and he suggested that we begin the Irish Action Plan with a higher level narrative text, informed by both lists of proposed actions. Out of this higher level text, we would then derive a set of SMART actions for the first plan. These would differ in detail from some of the proposals from either side, but they would hopefully address a large number of them and provide a basis for substantive progress on some of the OGP goals. (I would add, this should not close down further discussion on any proposals from civil society).
>
>
>
> Based on this, the following is my suggestion:
>
>
>
> 1. We want a process that leads to a jointly-drafted Action Plan between civil society and Government;
>
>
>
> 2. A steering group drawn from civil society needs to be established to provide continuity of contact between wider civil society and the Government. We need a small number of volunteers to commit to attending a regular number of meetings between now and April 2014, to engage with the Government on jointly-drafting the first Irish Action Plan;
>
>
>
> 3. The Government needs to commit to a series of meetings between now and April 2014 to work jointly on the first Irish OGP Action Plan;
>
>
>
> 4. All formal records of the process (e.g. Agendas, Minutes) should be posted online in a timely fashion after each meeting, so that wider civil society and the general public can access them and monitor the process;
>
>
>
> 5. Members of civil society have been consulted by Transparency International Ireland, leading to a report containing 62 recommended actions (some of which are multiple actions). Another 9 additional actions were submitted in parallel to this process, leading to a total of 71 civil society proposed actions (some of which have multiple aspects to them);
>
>
>
> 6. The Government is to produce a list of its own proposed actions for inclusion in the OGP Action Plan;
>
>
>
> 7. The first meeting of the Joint Government-Civil Society OGP Steering Group (hereafter Steering Group) should agree headers for high level narrative text within the first Action Plan – drawing on experience from other countries’ plans;
>
>
>
> 8. These headers should be elaborated with text that accurately reflects the diverse ideas and the overall direction of travel indicated in the TI report of the civil society consultations. It should equally represent the Programme for Government/civil service proposals;
>
>
>
> 9. Based on the high level text, subsequent meetings of the Steering Group should agree SMART actions to be included in the first Action Plan;
>
>
>
> 10. A draft Action Plan should then be published with sufficient time for wider civil society and the general public to make comments and suggestions;
>
>
>
> 11. The joint Steering Group than should meet to agree the final plan text for submission to the OGP Summit in April.
>
>
>
> 12. Periodic meetings of the joint Steering Group should continue to monitor progress on the plan, and prepare for its renewal.
>
>
>
> Come April 2014, no one is likely to be perfectly happy with the resultant Action Plan, however I would hope that it would give civil society the best possible compromise and a solid basis to see some new open government actions implemented that go beyond what was anticipated in the Programme for Government.
>
>
>
> Likewise, I would hope that the process would provide a basis for working together and with Government on open government that would be sustainable throughout the lifetime of the plan.
>
>
>
> One obvious sticking point is who from civil society gets to join the Steering Group? I suggest a group five or six people, to keep it manageable, all of whom should commit to attending monthly meetings until April 2014 and less frequent meetings thereafter. They would also have to commit to regular communication with wider civil society. I would like to see a balanced group, with no more than one or two people sharing the same organisational affiliation, and a balance of the sectors/interests represented in the consultation (e.g. those seeking open data; those seeking accountability for environmental decisions; those concerned with social justice; etc.). This is inevitably going to be a self-selected group, hence the importance of posting documents online and keeping channels of communication open with others. The membership of this group should be refreshed annually.
>
>
>
> There is already work ongoing to form a series of thematic working groups (following similar topics to the ones being formed at international level in OGP), so that everyone interested in a given topic has an opportunity to voice their suggestions and concerns between meetings of the Steering Group. Facilitating this and attending relevant working groups would be an additional commitment required of anyone volunteering to join the Steering Group.
>
>
>
> I hope this is of some use in moving things forward. Comments welcome.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> Nat
>
> Nat O'Connor MA PhD
>
> Director
>
> TASC – Think-tank for Action on Social Change
>
> Second Floor, Castleriver House, 14-15 Parliament Street
> Dublin 2, Ireland
>
> Tel: +353 1 6169050
> Email: noconnor at tascnet.ie
> Web: www.tasc.ie
> Blog: www.progressive-economy.ie
>
> Research and Organisation Services Ltd. TA/ TASC. Registered Address: Hill House, 26 Sion Hill Road, Drumcondra, Dublin 9. Company No. 342993. CHY 14778.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Dr Jane Suiter
>
> School of Communications
>
> Dublin City University
>
> Dublin 9
>
> IRELAND
>
>
>
> phone: +353.1.7006393
>
> e-mail: jane.suiter at dcu.ie
>
> web: http://www.dcu.ie/info/staff_member.php?id_no=4637
>
> skype: janesuiter
>
> twitter: @JaneSuit
>
>
> Email Disclaimer
>
> "This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for use by the addressee. Any unauthorised dissemination, distribution or copying of this message and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender and delete the message. Any views or opinions presented in this e-mail may solely be the views of the author and cannot be relied upon as being those of Dublin City University. E-mail communications such as this cannot be guaranteed to be virus-free, timely, secure or error-free and Dublin City University does not accept liability for any such matters or their consequences. Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail."
>
> Séanadh Ríomhphoist
>
> "Tá an ríomhphost seo agus aon chomhad a sheoltar leis faoi rún agus is lena úsáid ag an seolaí agus sin amháin é. Tá cosc iomlán ar scaipeadh, dháileadh nó chóipeáil neamhúdaraithe ar an teachtaireacht seo agus ar aon cheangaltán atá ag dul leis. Má tá an ríomhphost seo faighte agat trí dhearmad cuir sin in iúl le do thoil don seoltóir agus scrios an teachtaireacht. D’fhéadfadh sé gurb iad tuairimí an údair agus sin amháin atá in aon tuairimí no dearcthaí atá curtha i láthair sa ríomhphost seo agus níor chóir glacadh leo mar thuairimí nó dhearcthaí Ollscoil Chathair Bhaile Átha Cliath. Ní ghlactar leis go bhfuil cumarsáid ríomhphoist den sórt seo saor ó víreas, in am, slán, nó saor ó earráid agus ní ghlacann Ollscoil Chathair Bhaile Átha Cliath le dliteanas in aon chás den sórt sin ná as aon iarmhairt a d’eascródh astu. Cuimhnigh ar an timpeallacht le do thoil sula gcuireann tú an ríomhphost seo i gcló."
>
> _______________________________________________
> okfn-irl mailing list
> okfn-irl at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-irl
---------------------------------
Shawn Day
Email: day.shawn at gmail.com
Mob. +353 (0)83 002 4264
Twitter: @iridium
------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-irl/attachments/20131121/c4523878/attachment-0005.html>
More information about the okfn-irl
mailing list