James Riley
Monday, 03 May 2010 23:15
Opinion and Analysis
Page 1 of 2
Lindsay Tanner and Joe Ludwig shared the driving when they delivered a truckload of Government 2.0 policy initiatives to the Commonwealth public sector. But they should have organised a truckload of money to implement the plans to be dropped off at the same time.
The Australian Government will soon issue a Declaration of Open Government as the central document in its drive to adopt Web 2.0 technologies in public administration.
The declaration will effectively set out an aspirational goal to make access to government information the default position of departments and agencies. It will outline its aim to use 2.0 tools to engage more with the citizenry in policy development.
And it's pretty hard to argue that these are anything but worthy goals. Of course we want our governments to be more transparent. Few would argue the case for more secretive or opaque decision making.
But this drive toward Government 2.0 has less to do with technology than it does culture. The successful implementation of the Government 2.0 Taskforce reports recommendations will require a top-down re-working of the way our public service operates, and the way our public servants think.
Finance Minister Tanner has made plain in his speeches and blog posts on the issue that cultural change is the main game. And cultural change in a bureaucracy as large as the Australian Public Service doesn't come easily and it won't come cheap. It certainly won't be fast.
But the changes will be implemented through existing departmental budgets. You have to wonder. The technology is cheap and effective. The change program required to implement it will not be.
So the carrot being offered to the APS to get the work done is miserly. But where's the stick.
Australia is following the lead of 2.0 developments in the public sector already taking place in the US. But the US example differs in that President Obama set a timetable for all Federal agencies to meet in opening up public sector information, and in implementing collaborative 'engagement' policies.