Michael Hardner Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 Canada Joins International Open Govt Partnership My pet topic, once again. Harvey Low represented Canada at the recent Open Government conference in Brazil and it seems that projects are being launched, and the movement is transitioning from a position of publicizing and talking to doing. We've seen citizen dashboards and projects launched across the world. Tony Clement and Hillary Clinton were there. Last night Citizen Bridge helped put together a talk on the OGP conference, which I reviewed on my blog. The best thing about the discussion was the absence of left/right discussion, and the focus on the mechanics of democracy. I'm thinking and wondering what McLuhan would have thought about this situation: citizens getting together to try to get ahead of technology and try to engage with it, and use it to achieve democratic goals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 Harper Conservatives < > Open Government Democracy Watch: Federal Conservatives' Open Government Action Plan fails to fulfill Open Government Partnership (OGP) membership requirements -- fails to commit to strengthening access-to-information, ethics, lobbying, political finance, financial administration, public consultation and whistleblower protection laws and enforcement Tuesday, April 17, 2012Today, as representatives of 60 countries gather in Brasilia, Brazil to present their two-year action plans at the first international Open Government Partnership (OGP) meeting, the nation-wide Open Government Coalition, Government Ethics Coalition and Money in Politics Coalition, made up of more than 70 citizen groups in total with three million members (all coordinated by Democracy Watch), called on the OGP Steering Committee to reject the federal Conservatives' Action Plan for failing to fulfill its own commitment to increase government integrity. The Conservatives committed to taking positive steps forward in three areas (what OGP calls Grand Challenges): 1. increasing public integrity; 2. improving public services, and; 3. effectively managing public resources. However, the Conservatives' Action Plan focuses only on making currently available information available online through open data systems, does not contain any measures to increase public integrity or increase accountability for mismanagement of public resources, and tries to claim credit for open government and public consultation initiatives the Liberals implemented years ago. And given the Conservatives' recent multibillion dollar F-35 fighter jet and prison spending boondoggles, and G8 summit spending scandal, it couldn't be easier for them to more effectively manage public resources. In all these ways, the Conservatives' Action Plan violates the Open Government Partnership (OGP) requirements set out in the Open Government Declaration that all countries are required to sign. To fulfill the Declaration requirements, the Conservatives' Plan had to commit to strengthening open government in every way (as they did during the 2006 election with so-called "Federal Accountability Act" pledge -- though they broke almost all of their promises). Their Action Plan should have included measures to strengthen not only transparency laws and enforcement, but also federal ethics, lobbying, anti-corruption, political finance, financial administration, whistleblower protection and public consultation laws and enforcement, in government and in the private sector. As a result, the OGP Steering Committee should reject the Conservatives Action Plan, and criticize them strongly for trying to claim they are doing much more than they are. "The federal Conservatives continue to try to spin their limited online data activities as an actual open government action plan, and continue to refuse to keep their commitments to strengthening the rules and enforcement systems in federal transparency, ethics, anti-corruption, lobbying, consultation, whistleblower protection, political finance, and waste prevention laws, and so the international Open Government Partnership Steering Committee should reject and criticize their plan," said Tyler Sommers, Coordinator of Democracy Watch. "Secret, unethical lobbying, secret donations, secret expenses, excessive secrecy overall, conflicts of interest and sole-source contracts are currently legal, enforcement of key democracy and good government laws is too weak, as is whistleblower protection and public consultation, and so many key changes are clearly needed to ensure everyone in federal politics is effectively required to act honestly, openly, ethically, representatively and to prevent waste." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted May 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 Interesting, but it's a little too politically loaded. Canada's integrity and lack of corruption make that aspect of OGP a lower priority, and at the OGP summary discussion last night, Harvey Low didn't specifically mention corruption. Canada's priority really needs to be services, as Wayne Chu explained that most Canadians see government in terms of services, and engagement at all levels of government is bundled with perception of service management. Mr. Low did recommend that the government provide stronger timelines, and there was a general recommendation that FOI legislation is too reactive and not enough in the current age. Of course, I'm pretty sure that it's not lost on anyone that the nefarious activities of the G20 preparation came out of the same ministry that is responsible for this, but I'm sure we can let bygones be bygones as we look to the future with wary eyes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 Interesting, but it's a little too politically loaded. Canada's integrity and lack of corruption make that aspect of OGP a lower priority, and at the OGP summary discussion last night, Harvey Low didn't specifically mention corruption. I don't think there is a lack of corruption as the corruption may not be reported as often as it should be. Of course, I'm pretty sure that it's not lost on anyone that the nefarious activities of the G20 preparation came out of the same ministry that is responsible for this, but I'm sure we can let bygones be bygones as we look to the future with wary eyes. You might forgive, but don't EVER forget. The bygones seem to keep coming back and biting us in the ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 You might forgive, but don't EVER forget. The bygones seem to keep coming back and biting us in the ass. I'll never forgive the years and years of utterly corrupt mismanagement of my region's ecosystems and economy at the hands of the same government promoting itself as committed to open transparent government. Ottawa's lying through it's rotten teeth, always has and always will. That so many Canadians are so willing to forget and forgive that is demoralizing and depressing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted May 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 I don't think there is a lack of corruption as the corruption may not be reported as often as it should be. You need to frame the problem of corruption in a global context. Many countries in the world have outright stealing, or open favouritism, or excessive influence by certain parties. It's not perfect in Canada, but we're certainly in the top 5/10%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 (edited) Canada Joins International Open Govt Partnership My pet topic, once again. this seems the appropriate time quote you "PR open government has been explored to death on this forum" I'm thinking when it comes to open government PR is better, it's more difficult to cheat when you have an partner/adversary looking over your shoulder waiting for you to slip up... Edited May 17, 2012 by wyly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted May 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 this seems the appropriate time quote you "PR open government has been explored to death on this forum" I'm the only one bringing it up though. I'm thinking when it comes to open government PR is better, it's more difficult to cheat when you have an partner/adversary looking over your shoulder waiting for you to slip up... More politics doesn't make for less cheating... see France, Italy, Greece... Europe in general. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 More politics doesn't make for less cheating... see France, Italy, Greece... virtually impossible to eliminate crooks but when you have partners who have no loyalty to you watching every move you make it certainly makes it more difficult to cheat...see Divine government Saskatchewan, Mulroney government Canada, numerous American elected officials Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich and George Ryan...Europe in general.and that's a generalization, you pick up on a few scandals reported in the media and conclude "Europe in general" show me how Denmark, Finland, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden are "generally" worse than N America... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted May 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 virtually impossible to eliminate crooks but when you have partners who have no loyalty to you watching every move you make it certainly makes it more difficult to cheat...see Divine government Saskatchewan, Mulroney government Canada, numerous American elected officials Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich and George Ryan... and that's a generalization, you pick up on a few scandals reported in the media and conclude "Europe in general" show me how Denmark, Finland, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden are "generally" worse than N America... You picked some of the good 'uns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 Harper Conservatives < > Open Government Democracy Watch: Federal Conservatives' Open Government Action Plan fails to fulfill Open Government Partnership (OGP) membership requirements -- fails to commit to strengthening access-to-information, ethics, lobbying, political finance, financial administration, public consultation and whistleblower protection laws and enforcement "The federal Conservatives continue to try to spin their limited online data activities as an actual open government action plan, and continue to refuse to keep their commitments to strengthening the rules and enforcement systems in federal transparency, ethics, anti-corruption, lobbying, consultation, whistleblower protection, political finance, and waste prevention laws, and so the international Open Government Partnership Steering Committee should reject and criticize their plan," said Tyler Sommers, Coordinator of Democracy Watch. "Secret, unethical lobbying, secret donations, secret expenses, excessive secrecy overall, conflicts of interest and sole-source contracts are currently legal, enforcement of key democracy and good government laws is too weak, as is whistleblower protection and public consultation, and so many key changes are clearly needed to ensure everyone in federal politics is effectively required to act honestly, openly, ethically, representatively and to prevent waste." open & transparent Harper Conservatives - ya think! Canada languishes in world rankings for government openness As the 30th anniversary of the federal Access to Information Act approaches, Canada finds itself tied for 51st in the world on a list of freedom-of-information rankings, languishing behind Angola, Colombia and Niger. "As a country that was once among the world's leaders in government openness, it is unfortunate that Canada has dropped so far down the list. Partly, this is the result of global progress, with which Canada has failed to keep pace," says an analysis accompanying the rankings. There have been repeated calls from pro-democracy groups and the federal information commissioner's office to modernize the act for the 21st century. In October 2009, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson rejected a House of Commons committee's call to update the access law, saying it was a strong piece of legislation. "Canada's lax timelines, imposition of access fees, lack of a proper public interest override, and blanket exemptions for certain political offices all contravene international standards for the right of access," says the report. "Canada's antiquated approach to access to information is also the result of a lack of political will to improve the situation." There have been several attempts to reform and revamp Canada's law, "and all have been defeated in one way or another," the report notes. "We hope that Canada's poor showing here will be a wake-up call to the fact that global standards for implementation of the right to information have moved past what the Access to Information Act can provide, and will spur our politicians to act in order to give proper implementation to the right to information." The federal Treasury Board, the department responsible for access policy, had no immediate comment on the rankings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 I'll never forgive the years and years of utterly corrupt mismanagement of my region's ecosystems and economy at the hands of the same government promoting itself as committed to open transparent government. Ottawa's lying through it's rotten teeth, always has and always will. That so many Canadians are so willing to forget and forgive that is demoralizing and depressing. LOL Take a look around the world if you want to see what destroying the eviro is all about. I am getting tired of people blaming harper for every ill going on. If people are really serious about the enviro,then put away the political correctness and tell the truth, over population is killing the planet, but to do that you are going to offend the non white countries that are spitting out kids left and right. And lets get back to cleaning this planet instead of trying to think of new kyotos that do nothing. That is what Ms May did before she started to hang out with the suzuki's of the world. When I 1st heard of her she was out trying to get the halfax tar ponds cleaned up. Did that ever happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 If people are really serious about the enviro,then put away the political correctness and tell the truth, over population is killing the planet, but to do that you are going to offend the non white countries that are spitting out kids left and right. North Americans have a far more destructive environmental footprint than others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 This open government initiative actually sounds pretty dangerous to me. Im worried it will end up like the FOI act which will lull us into a sense of open government without really forcing government to be open. The ONLY way to have open government is to make it so that the government has to ask the permission of an independant body for PERMISSION to not disclose something. The fundamental way that government operates has to be tipped upside down. Right now the government looks at its gigantic body of data and asks "what information do we legally have to disclose". Instead the body of information should be public by default and the government should be asking "what information can we get a license to classify". Right now our best hope for open government is organizations like wikileaks. As more and more information because digital we will have opportunities to TAKE it from the government WITHOUT their permission. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 This open government initiative actually sounds pretty dangerous to me. Im worried it will end up like the FOI act which will lull us into a sense of open government without really forcing government to be open. FOI was from another era. We need more today. The ONLY way to have open government is to make it so that the government has to ask the permission of an independant body for PERMISSION to not disclose something. That's a pipe dream. Instead, we can hope that forward-thinking administrations push their bureaucracies a little bit, and that some see benefits in this way of working. The fundamental way that government operates has to be tipped upside down. Right now the government looks at its gigantic body of data and asks "what information do we legally have to disclose". Instead the body of information should be public by default and the government should be asking "what information can we get a license to classify". Right now our best hope for open government is organizations like wikileaks. As more and more information because digital we will have opportunities to TAKE it from the government WITHOUT their permission. Also the Sunlight Foundation, and a global grass roots movement that is trying to raise awareness and pressure on the bureaucracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 FOI was from another era. We need more today. That's a pipe dream. Instead, we can hope that forward-thinking administrations push their bureaucracies a little bit, and that some see benefits in this way of working. Also the Sunlight Foundation, and a global grass roots movement that is trying to raise awareness and pressure on the bureaucracy. I think the pipe dream is you expecting the fox to fix the holes in the fence around your chicken coup. He will never do it because he wants to get in and eat your chickens. And by expecting government to voluntarily give up the secrecy from which much of their power is derived you are doing just that. I personally see a trend in government of less transparency for THEM, but more transparency for US. Theres a whole pile of pending legislation to allow them to keep an eye on us, but nothing thats pointed in the other direction. That's a pipe dream. Its the only way it can work though besides the "honor system". As soon as government can arbitrarily classify even a single piece of data it becomes impossible for to keep them honest... because since the classified data is now kept from us, how can we make sure that it was properly classified. Government becomes a black box, and we are putting faith in their good will and honest which wont go well. I admire your optimism but you are expecting people who hate our freedom to just voluntarily give us more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 I think the pipe dream is you expecting the fox to fix the holes in the fence around your chicken coup. He will never do it because he wants to get in and eat your chickens. True enough, but who are the fox and who are the chickens ? And by expecting government to voluntarily give up the secrecy from which much of their power is derived you are doing just that. I personally see a trend in government of less transparency for THEM, but more transparency for US. Theres a whole pile of pending legislation to allow them to keep an eye on us, but nothing thats pointed in the other direction. Its the only way it can work though besides the "honor system". As soon as government can arbitrarily classify even a single piece of data it becomes impossible for to keep them honest... because since the classified data is now kept from us, how can we make sure that it was properly classified. Government becomes a black box, and we are putting faith in their good will and honest which wont go well. I admire your optimism but you are expecting people who hate our freedom to just voluntarily give us more. The head of the executive has as much to want this as does the citizen. They're responsible for what goes on in government, however they have little idea what is actually being done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 True enough, but who are the fox and who are the chickens ? The head of the executive has as much to want this as does the citizen. They're responsible for what goes on in government, however they have little idea what is actually being done. I think the only way that we will ever trend significantly in the direction you want us to go (and I want it too), is if this becomes one of the top 2 issues voters are concerned about, and with half of the Canadian population being state power sycophants, and the other half just being apathetic cowards I dont see it happening. I hope Im wrong though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 The head of the executive has as much to want this as does the citizen. I strongly disagree. The political class loves secrecy, and hates the idea of an informed electorate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 I strongly disagree. The political class loves secrecy, and hates the idea of an informed electorate. But the executives have little control over the beast. Read Bob Rae's "From Protest to Power" and you'll find out what his experience was trying to bring change to the civil service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fletch 27 Posted June 26, 2012 Report Share Posted June 26, 2012 These are bold,, new step never taken by any past Canadian Governments.. I'm very glad we are doing this. Its refreshing to see a partys adopt this and take it to a higher level of transparency. Good job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted June 26, 2012 Report Share Posted June 26, 2012 Open Government Not Here... Still Coming... Via the government? Dream on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 26, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2012 Via the government? Dream on. Bob Rae was so unable to figure out how his bureaucracy worked, that he suspected them of conspiring against him. Keep in mind that these folks are lawyers, not people with Operations Management experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted June 26, 2012 Report Share Posted June 26, 2012 Open and transparent, I laugh when I hear people talking about that. IMO I don't think any goverment could operate that way and even if mulcair formed a govermnet he to would do the same. It is a joke and getting tired of people complaining about it, it is not ever going to open or transparent, it is immpossible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 26, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2012 Open and transparent, I laugh when I hear people talking about that. IMO I don't think any goverment could operate that way and even if mulcair formed a govermnet he to would do the same. It is a joke and getting tired of people complaining about it, it is not ever going to open or transparent, it is immpossible. It's not a binary thing, there are degrees of Openness. There will never be 100% transparency, at least not while we have private wealth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.