From: Dan Jellinek [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 12:37 PM
To: egovbulletin
Subject: E-Government Bulletin - January 2001
Please forward this free service to colleagues
so they can subscribe by sending a blank
email to [log in to unmask]
- full details at the end.
We never pass on email addresses.
For further information, an online archive
and our privacy policy see:
http://www.headstar.com/egb
[Issue starts]
E-GOVERNMENT BULLETIN
The Email Newsletter On Electronic Government,
UK And Worldwide.
ISSUE 95, JANUARY 2001
IN THIS ISSUE:
Section One: News
- Comedian raises profile of data protection rights; Schools urged to make
net
access safe; E-government partnership goes regional; 'Super-regulator' will
help
push universal access; Digital divide remains wide; E-government targets
threatened by low salaries; Scottish Executive upholds interoperability
standards; News round-up: e-voting in Canberra, English Partnerships;
Intellectual property.
Section Two: Teledemocracy
- FaxYourMP.com
Section Three: Reader Response
- Email Management
Section Four: Opinion
- E-Government
[End of contents]
SECTION ONE: NEWS
COMEDIAN RAISES PROFILE OF DATA PROTECTION RIGHTS
Government departments face increased scrutiny of their emails following the
high-profile release this week of embarrassing internal emails from the
Department of Trade and Industry to a popular comedian under the 1998 Data
Protection Act.
Following a run-in with the DTI over export schemes, the Channel Four
political
satirist Mark Thomas put in a standard 'subject access' request to the DTI
and
received a batch of more or less abusive emails revealing officials had
attempted
to "starve him of information".
Whatever one's views of the accuracy of the abuse, the result is likely to
make
Whitehall officials think twice before using colourful language to describe
any
individual. It could also signal a steep rise in the number of subject
access
requests, after Thomas received widespread publicity for his case.
"It's one of our jobs to make people aware of their rights, and so anything
that
does this is a good thing", a spokeswoman for the Data Protection
Commissioner told E-Government Bulletin. "Something like this may well work
better than our own advertisements".
Under the 1998 Act, which came into force in March 2000, anyone seeking to
request an organisation to disclose any personal information held on them
can
do so, although 'data controllers' are entitled to charge a fee of up to #10
for the
information.
Organisations have 40 days to respond with any information they have about
the
individual; a description of why the information was processed; anyone it
may
be passed to or seen by, and the logic involved in any automated decisions.
If they fail to comply they face possible legal action. The Data Protection
Commissioner Elizabeth France can demand the data be released, and in some
cases compensation can be sought in the courts.
The basic power to request personal data has actually existed since 1984,
although the new act expands the right to include some paper records and
strengthens the right to redress. "When the first act came in there was a
fear
among data holders that they would be inundated with requests, but that was
not
the case - requests only tended to come in when individuals faced some kind
of
trouble. But [the Mark Thomas case] could lead to a general increase", the
spokeswoman said.
The DTI says it accepts such requests by letter or email, although before
they
are acted on 'reasonable steps' may be taken to verify the questioner's
identity
such as a name and address check.
The department has received a dozen such enquiries since March, but if the
commissioner's office's hunch is right, this could be set to rise. For
further
information on data protection see:
http://www.dataprotection.gov.uk/
And the Data Protection Act 1998 is at:
http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/19980029.htm
SCHOOLS URGED TO MAKE NET ACCESS SAFE
Email bullying, the potential for strangers to contact pupils in chat rooms
and
the filtering of damaging material on the web are among issues covered in a
new
'e-policy for education' report released this week by the head teachers'
portal
Schoolmanager.net (http://www.schoolmanager.net).
As well as covering schools' legal obligations, the report recommends that
best
practice for schools includes procedures for pupils and staff to follow if
they
receive uncomfortable or disturbing material by email; regular sessions on
e-
safety as part of a school's technology curriculum; and arrangements to
archive
or delete emails that are more than a set number of days old.
The use of web site rating or filtering software by schools and libraries
has
recently become a political hot potato in the US, following the unexpected
passing of a federal law stating that any school or library refusing to
install
filtering software will lose federal technology subsidies.
The Children's Internet Protection Act - which was unexpectedly tacked on to
a
450 Billion federal spending bill passed by Congress before Christmas - has
raised concerns among free speech advocates who argue it amounts to federal
censorship and violates the First Amendment. The American Civil Liberties
Union (http://www.aclu.org), which has successfully challenged similar laws
in
the past, is squaring up for a legal battle which could reverse the law.
E-GOVERNMENT PARTNERSHIP GOES REGIONAL
The 'Promoting Electronic Government' (PEG) project
(http://www.peg.org.uk/), a central-local government collaboration, is to
hold a
series of awareness-raising regional seminars over the next few weeks.
PEG is a two year project running to April 2002, which aims to develop a
toolkit
supporting internal change within local authorities to help them gear up for
electronic services.
It is a partnership between the Department of the Environment, Transport and
the Regions; around 30 local authorities; the Local Government Improvement
and Development Agency; the Federation of the Electronics Industry; and
consultants CDW & Associates.
The project aims to build a critical mass of local authorities working in
similar
ways to take e-government forward at the local level. There are already 30
councils involved, and the project's aim is to have involved 25% or more of
councils by May 2002.
Its seminars will run from 22 January - 1 February in Bristol, Walsall,
Bolton,
North Tyneside, Doncaster, Camden, Bracknell Forest and Peterborough at a
cost of 90 UK Pounds per delegate. For more information see:
http://www.eipdg.org/PEGawareness.doc
'SUPER-REGULATOR' WILL HELP PUSH UNIVERSAL ACCESS
A proposed new 'super-regulator' for all forms of telecommunications,
broadcasting and the Internet, 'OFCOM', will play a key part in ensuring the
government hits its target to provide Internet access for every UK citizen
by
2005, according to the new Communications White Paper.
OFCOM will be an amalgamation of several current regulatory bodies for
broadcasting, internet, telecoms and radio, including OFTEL and the
Independent Television Commission, in recognition of the increasing links
between traditional and new media.
The regulator will also seek to promote widespread access to higher
bandwidth
services, bringing together public and private sector stakeholders to
develop a
practical broadband strategy.
The Communications White Paper can be found at:
http://www.communicationswhitepaper.gov.uk
In a neat touch, the site can be viewed by key topics - subjects such as
Internet
or BBC can be selected via a drop-down menu, and the site returns references
to
relevant parts of the white paper.
Comments on the proposals - which will be published on the web unless people
request otherwise - are invited by 12 February.
DIGITAL DIVIDE REMAINS WIDE
The great digital divide shows little sign of narrowing according to recent
surveys in the UK and US.
Only seven per cent of the poorest households in the UK enjoy Internet
access,
compared to 62 per cent for those with the highest income, according to the
latest figures from the Office of National Statistics
(http://www.statistics.gov.uk). The most common reasons among non-Internet
users for not doing so were lack of interest, while others felt they had
little need
for it or lacked skills or confidence.
Despite recent efforts by the government to increase access, only 45 per
cent of
adults, or 20.5 million, had accessed the Internet by October 2000.
A separate report from Pro Active International
(http://www.proactiveinternational.com/) reveals the gender divide is wider
in
Europe than the US - 55 per cent of men and 52 per cent of women use the
Internet in America, while the figures for Europe are 34 per cent and 20 per
cent
respectively.
E-GOVERNMENT TARGETS THREATENED BY LOW SALARIES
Targets to make all government services available electronically by 2005 may
be difficult to hit unless the government reviews current salaries for its
IT staff,
according to a new report from the National Computing Centre.
The NCC's 'Salary and staff issues in IT 2001' survey reports salaries for
government are the lowest in the IT profession. Managers in the public
sector
receive on average around 34,000 pounds a year, while private sector
managers
receive 46,500.
NCC chief executive Michael Gough said: "If plans to put both central and
local
authority services online are to be fulfilled, the government is going to
have to
look long and hard at the way it pays its staff. These wide differences
between
sectors on pay will put pressure on local authority staffing levels,
finances and
government IT plans."
The survey itself will make a dent in most people's pay packets: it costs
260
Pounds (160 Pounds for NCC members) and can be ordered at:
http://www.ncc.co.uk/ncc/surveys.cfm
SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE UPHOLDS INTEROPERABILITY STANDARDS
The Scottish Executive has pledged to use the same technical standards and
guidelines in implementing online public services in Scotland as the rest of
the
UK, in a new report, 'Information Age government: a draft common framework'
(http://www.scotland.gov.uk/government/c21g/iag_dcf-00.asp).
The framework was designed to complement the UK government's 'e-
government: a strategic framework for public services', published in April
by
the Cabinet Office (http://www.citu.gov.uk/iagc/pdfs/Strategy.pdf).
It proposes to adopt the Cabinet Office's e-government interoperability
framework in Scotland, covering issues such as the use of the
'meta-language'
XML and Internet email standards. The Executive also promises to remove
unnecessary legal and policy barriers to electronic service delivery in
Scotland.
An online forum has been established to debate the proposals, and will run
to 23
March, at:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/forums/c21g-00.asp?X=OFF
As E-Government Bulletin went to press this forum contained a lone message
complaining the new document is too vague, and hoping that a promised action
plan might "put more meat on the bones".
NEWS ROUND-UP:
AUSTRALIAN PIONEER In what is claimed to be one of the most
sophisticated tests of electronic voting to date, citizens of Australia's
capital
Canberra will be able to vote in state elections in October using on-screen
ballots. The poll will use a complex preferential voting system, and a mix
of
online and paper ballots, although the latter will also be counted
electronically.
The state government, Australian Capital Territory, hopes internet voting
will be
an option in 2004. See:
http://www.elections.act.gov.au/Elecvote.html
LOCATION, LOCATION English Partnerships, the regeneration and
development agency, has relaunched its online property site database for
companies looking to locate or expand in England. The site is searchable by
a
range of criteria such as distance from motorways and airports, and also
carries
information on development grants. See:
http://www.englishsites.com/
COPYRIGHT JUNGLE The Patent Office has developed a new gateway to
information on intellectual property, to help people "find their way through
the
jungle of copyright, designs, patents and trade marks". It is at:
http://www.intellectual-property.gov.uk/
[Section One ends]
SECTION TWO: TELEDEMOCRACY
- FAXYOURMP.COM
GATEWAY OPENS STREAM OF MESSAGES FOR POLITICIANS
Over the past few weeks, in a traditionally quiet period, MPs have been
receiving a steady stream of faxes - at last count, upwards of 2,000 and
rising by
more than 100 a day - on constituency issues of all kinds, thanks to the new
web-to-fax gateway 'FaxYourMP.com'.
The site grew out of an earlier campaign called 'Stand.org.uk'
(http://www.stand.org.uk), launched in 1998 by a group of individuals
opposed
to the government's nascent E-Commerce Bill, which subsequently became the
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Bill and has now passed into law.
The group's intention was to use the Internet to help constituents inform
their
MPs of the perceived dangers of the legislation. It gained a high profile
and was
recognised as an innovator in this field when it was highly commended at the
Yell web awards 2000 (http://www.yell.com/awards).
Under the slogan '@dopt an MP', the site featured a postcode search engine
to
help people contact their local MPs, and inform them about the issues raised
by
the proposed legislation.
More than 6,000 people joined in, spurring the creation of a rudimentary
web-to-
fax gateway, which has since evolved into the current FaxYourMP.com service.
Since its creation several hundred MPs have been receiving faxes on issues
ranging from lobbying to obtaining general advice, and their response has
been
one of "guarded support", with only a few objecting to the gateway outright,
according to Tom Loosemore, one of the site's volunteers.
"Many were nervous that they would be swamped with copy-and-paste style 'I
think hunting/abortion/low-flying jets should be banned' messages. We added
some features and copy to the site to reduce the chance of this, and we've
had no
reports of any serious abuse.
"We amend our email address and phone/fax number to the end of each fax and
invite MPs to contact us if they have a problem."
One MP who has no objections to the service in principle is Shadow Leader of
the Commons Sir George Young. "My only concern was that I prefer email as
it's quicker, more convenient, cost-effective and can be accessed anywhere,
so I
requested that they change the service to incorporate it", Sir George says.
"Junk
e-mail can be managed much more easily [than faxes]."
Several other MPs have made the same request and accordingly,
FaxYourMP.com will soon be updating the service to combine fax and email
messaging.
Loosemore says the service has achieved its aim of lowering the barriers for
constituents to contact their MP.
"Many choose to lobby them on a issue; many have problems that their MP
could help them with. We are very strict about making sure people only fax
their
own MP. If we had more funds and time we would do even stricter checking to
authenticate that a user's whole postal address is valid, rather than just
their
postcode and email address.
"We also need to add a section on the site that educates people running
campaigns as to how to ask their supporters to lobby their MP. We have had
to
work hard to discourage copy-and-paste identikit faxes being sent, since
these
are usually counterproductive."
Already some positive results can be detected, he says. "We have had users
send
feedback saying their MP had put forward early day motions or made comments
in debates or started looking into their problems as a direct result of
their fax
from our site. Many MPs are responding to faxes the next day - some by
email,
many more by letter".
But there is still room for improvement: "We are still not happy with the
service,
since we can only afford to send faxes to MPs' Westminster fax machines,
rather than their more logical constituency fax number. We are just a bunch
of
volunteers however, and would be delighted to turn over our site to the
Parliamentary computer service for them to run properly".
Not everyone would be so delighted: there is still one MP, Loosemore says,
who
is refusing to answer faxes since they are not signed with a pen.
[Section Two ends]
SECTION THREE - READER RESPONSE
- EMAIL MANAGEMENT
INFORMATION OVERLOAD: SOLUTIONS AND DEFINITIONS
* In our last issue, Kevin Carey examined the issues surrounding potential
email
overload and email management by public bodies. The article generated some
excellent reader feedback: below, we reproduce two responses, from Adrian
Lewis at Lewisham Regeneration and Norman Gray at Starlink. If anyone else
would like to contribute to this debate please email the editor Dan Jellinek
on
[log in to unmask]
RESPONSE ONE: RETHINK YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE
It is always good management practice to define internal systems and
procedures before embarking on a technology that can fundamentally affect
the
work of an organisation.
But it doesn't always work like that. It may be that, just because an
organisation
has a web site, someone thinks "let's let people on the web send us e-mail".
But
no-one thinks through what the implications of this might be. The same thing
happened when fax came along, and let's not forget web-chat and now voice-
over-net.
If organisations keep adding channels of communication without rethinking
their infrastructure and re-evaluating the business processes that are
affected by
these new channels of communication, we are going to see more and more
organisations driving users away, simple because they can't properly
communicate - in the full sense of the word, implying interaction and
understanding - with users of their services.
One effective way of managing emails starts with the software manufactures
and
suppliers, who should have an obligation to condemn the use of their
products
by people to 'spam'. This could be achieved through a regulatory body,
association or collaborative forum, assessing and disseminating best
practice.
Most hosting service providers should (and many do) cut off their service to
anyone engaging in unsolicited bulk emailing.
A voluntary code on this may be difficult to organise or enforce, although
it may
improve companies' prospects if they sign up.
The first step for local authorities towards a comprehensive process of
e-mail
management should be to educate themselves in the issues involved, examining
cause and effect, and the implications of having no defined process for
coping.
The various local government associations should look to disseminate advice
and boost awareness of these issues through relevant web portals, journals
and
seminars.
An efficient combination of auto-response, intelligent routing and queuing
needs
to be applied to e-mails, just as they are to telephony based interactions.
In a
typical e-mail management system, auto response software can accommodate
most of the immediate answering services, which through database integration
can personalise responses as required. The facility can include a frequently
asked question database, which learns response formats, tied in with strict
rules
for verification or blocking.
Another option is to outsource email management to a partner organisation
with
the facility to disseminate difficult queries appropriately. Though this
offers a
means of filtering using both technology and human intervention, it reduces
control, and issues of confidentiality arise. Cost is often another barrier
to this
solution, though with advances in technology this will become less of an
issue.
Outsourcing solution providers are already offering to manage emails for
organisations who neither have the expertise, technology and finance to
procure
or implement bespoke or off-the-shelf packages.
For further reading and a US perspective, see:
http://www.salonmag.com/21st/feature/1998/10/cov_30feature2.html
* This response was from Adrian Lewis, Project Manager, Lewisham
Regeneration
RESPONSE TWO: PUBLIC FEEDBACK IS NOT SPAM
In issue 94 of E-government bulletin, Kevin Carey wrote: 'Welcome to a world
of spam'. Now, email overload is a real issue, but it's unhelpful - because
it's
inaccurate - to confuse that with spam.
Spam is unsolicited commercial email. It's the electronic equivalent of junk
mail, with the difference that, whereas even the cheapest flyers cost the
advertiser money to produce and distribute, spam costs almost nothing to
produce, but costs its recipients money to receive. Spam is a well-known,
well-
defined menace, and there are well-known defences against it (see, for
example,
<http://uk.spam.abuse.net/spam/>).
What the article was talking about, however, was simply correspondence, or
public feedback. Its recipients may not particularly enjoy receiving it,
especially
if the bulk of it is complaints, and they may feel overwhelmed by its
volume; but
it is not advertising, and should probably not be treated with the same
distaste as
adverts for leather underwear and get-rich-quick schemes.
From a strictly technical (as opposed to organisational) point of view,
email
overload can be addressed by using sophisticated email client software. Many
mail clients have filtering of some sort or another, which allows your mail
program to put incoming messages in different folders, or to prioritise
them,
depending on the sender, or the subject, or other indicators.
* This response was from Norman Gray, of the Physics and Astronomy
Department, University of Glasgow. Norman is a programmer with Starlink, a
specialist national astronomy computer system
(http://www.starlink.rl.ac.uk/).
[Editor's note: the headline for Kevin Carey's article, 'Welcome to a world
of
spam', was not actually written by Kevin - mea culpa].
[Section Three ends]
SECTION FOUR: OPINION
- E-GOVERNMENT
FIGHTING THEIR CORNER - THE PROBLEMS OF TERRITORIALISM
The UK government is busy pushing forward a vision of a society heavily
supported by Internet technologies. For those having to implement these
ideas,
however, an unfortunate dichotomy is apparent, for from central government
downwards people in positions of leadership appear to have little
understanding
or knowledge of the technologies involved.
The prime example of a knowledge gap among leadership is that of the Prime
Minister, who by all accounts has little knowledge of the basic principles
involved in the use of modern technologies like the Internet.
In fairness, this is a trait he shares with many senior council officers and
elected
members. We are not talking here of profound truths, just the ability to use
electronic mail and the Internet with reasonable success. Many are taking
steps
to make up that knowledge gap, but it remains widespread.
There are a string of other problems evident with the rapid implementation
of e-
government. For example, while a middle-class majority in society are busy
gaining experience of these technologies, the people at the bottom of the
economic pile are ignoring the technology in favour of DVD and games.
Digital television has been proposed as the solution to providing online
services
for the economically excluded, but the major Internet technology is
ubiquitous
email, which is rather more useful when storage, printing and other
facilities are
available - not features of the average television.
A further barrier to progress is territorialism within government and local
government from those who appear to fear loss of control, namely some senior
officers or council members who are resisting the implementation of e-
strategies. This is a rather different concept from the much-discussed
'silo-
mentality' of rigid departmentalism - this is one where self-interest takes
over.
Particular technologies throw up their own further problems. A recent
television
documentary on stress warned of the dangers that an under resourced one-stop
shop can have on customers and staff; call centres are proving unpopular
with
some people after poor experiences; and the telephone is still a favourite
means
of contact, but the use of this may have to be improved without the queuing
and
machine-responses loathed by call-centre users.
Finally, there is the issue of funding. Areas of central government that
have had
bucket loads of money pushed into their electronic service delivery schemes
wonder why cash-strapped rural districts, without the resources to chase for
extra funding, can't throw up all-singing and all-dancing websites or
solutions
like theirs.
Local government must learn from all the above points. It must learn from
others, but not merely replicate the private sector without taking in to
account
that its 'customers' cannot always go elsewhere.
The key to making progress is the intelligent use of partnerships in
developing
services. While there are currently few clear indicators to measuring
electronic
service delivery, partnerships do appear to be a successful method of making
progress. However, territorialism is a major restraint on forming
partnerships.
How can e-government succeed when those who should be promoting its use do
not appear to practice it or, in the face of financial restraints, look
outside their
own realms towards using partnerships with others to find a way around them?
Perhaps a fifth Best Value 'C' should join the other four: while seeking to
be
competitive, organisations should also be co-operative.
* This article is a personal view by Mick Phythian, IT Support Manager at
Ryedale District Council. Mick spent nine months of 2000 writing a Masters
dissertation entitled 'Service delivery using Internet technologies - a
study of
English district councils'. His own research for the project included a
survey of
45% of all English districts.
[Section Four ends]
HOW TO RECEIVE E-GOVERNMENT BULLETIN
To subscribe to this free monthly bulletin,
e-mail [log in to unmask]
Please encourage your colleagues to subscribe!
To unsubscribe at any time, email:
[log in to unmask]
For further information on subscription, including how to subscribe or
unsubscribe from an alternative email address and how to find out if an
particular address is subscribed, see:
http://www.headstar.com/egb/subs.html
Please send comments on coverage or leads to
Dan Jellinek at: [log in to unmask]
Copyright 2001 Headstar Ltd
The Bulletin may be reproduced in full as long as all parts including this
copyright notice are included. Sections of the report may be quoted as long
as
they are clearly sourced and our web site address (www.headstar.com/egb) is
also cited.
A searchable archive of our back-issues can be found on our web site.
[Issue ends]
************************************************************************************
Distributed through Cyber-Society-Live [CSL]: CSL is a moderated discussion
list made up of people who are interested in the interdisciplinary academic
study of Cyber Society in all its manifestations.To join the list please visit:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/cyber-society-live.html
*************************************************************************************
|
