Creating Community Conversations - Gallomanor

UK GovCamp - Mission Accomplished?

I went to yesterday's UKGovCamp mainly to catch up with people I don't see enough and to stay in touch with what is happening in the Digital Gov world.  I don't think I was alone. The majority of people gave the impression during the introductions that they were there to learn.

I don't think it was always like that.

My memories of the first UKGovCamp in January 2008 are of a smaller, angrier, and impatient group of people who were there to work out how to change the way Government did digital.

IIRC there were conversations about publishing content and data in a machine readable format, about government gaining a human voice, about becoming more agile (although I don't think we used that word) in procurement and development. We wanted innovation.  Lots of it.

We talked about ways to get decision makers on board. We knew what had gone before wasn't good enough and we wanted to make it better. It was very exciting.

It seemed to me yesterday that the session which generated the most excitement was the last one. Mike Bracken, the GDS Digital Director, gave an overview of what he and his 180 strong team are up to. The room was packed, at least 5 people came to the front to take photographs in a mini-papping session.

One department web manager asked Mike when they should expect to turn their domains off. It was a brilliant question. Very simple but massively loaded with other issues.  Prime among them being: is it worth us innovating with the imminent move to a single domain? It encapsulated something for me that has been apparent for the last 6 months. If you want to be doing cool digital stuff in government then you need to be in GDS working on BetaGov.

In 2008 it was the people participating in UKGovCamp that were doing the cool, innovative, digital things in Government. Now we are looking at others doing that innovation and wondering what impact they will have on us.

In one sense it is mission accomplished. Mike Bracken acknowledged the debt that GDS owed to GovCampers. We wanted that innovation, we helped create the environment that meant it could happen. GovCamp succeeded. 

But there is a danger - it was said that in today's economic climate we can't afford to let "1,000 flowers bloom". The innovation currently being displayed at GDS means that this is not a big concern at the moment. But how about in two years or five years when those innovators move on, or a new generation of users need services. Where will the innovation come from. UKGovCamp 2017?

 

 

Royal Mail and the Postcode Address File - epetition response

Number Ten Downing Street wrote a response to the petition

“We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to release the address and postal code data held within the Royal Mail’s PAF to the public.”

In short they are saying, "not our problem, talk to Postcomm".  Some feel this is a cop-out, but nevertheless it is their policy to pass on the issue to the regulator.  After all:

Under Section 116 of the Postal Services Act 2000, Royal Mail must maintain the PAF and make it available to any person who wishes to use it on “such terms as are reasonable”.  This requirement is replicated as a condition of Royal Mail’s licence.

If the Royal Mail are not abiding by the terms of their licence then their regulator should be asked to make sure they do.

Provision exists for Royal Mail to recover a reasonable charge for the supply of PAF.  However it must not impose any term or condition other than reasonable restrictions to safeguard its intellectual property rights (IPR), and to ensure that the PAF and its updates are used to support effective addressing.

So the question is whether £3,750 for a click-per-use licence is a reasonable charge or not.  Does this mean the Royal Mail is permitted to make a profit on the sale of licences for the PAF? Are they able to recoup the cost of creating and maintaining the database or should that cost be accounted for with the efficiencies they gain from accurate addressing on their delivery operation?

It isn't going to be easy to win this battle.  The Royal Mail won't want to give up the licence fees; many of their existing customers won't because it may lower the barriers to entry into their market.

No. 10 seem to have passed the buck and therefore it may be time to write to Postcomm.  But what will make them take action?  Pressure from politicians of course (although Messers Clarke and Thurso have yet to acknowledge reciept of an email). Pressure from the press, possibly.  Pressure from the public, it can't hurt.  Clear evidence that Royal Mail are in the wrong, perhaps?

Even with the right strategy, the basics won't be easy.  Postcomm don't make it easy to contact them.  They mostly try to get you to contact the Royal Mail and then offer a single info@psc.gov.uk address.  Which of course auto-responds "Out of Office" telling you to complain about the Royal Mail to the Royal Mail and promising a response within 7 days "If your query relates directly to Postcomm or our policies"

Ho-hum.  Let's keep trying.

UPDATE:  Philip Groves from Postcomm has responded and asked that I send  my complaint to him.  His email is firstname.lastname@psc.gov.uk

Royal Mail stifling innovation

The Royal Mail is stifling innovation and increasing costs for this country through charging for the Postcode Address File (PAF) at monopoly prices.  Local Authorities who provide the Royal Mail with some of the raw data for the PAF in the form of details of new streets are amongst the hardest hit. 

This week the Royal Mail got it's lawyers to send a Cease and Desist letter to ErnestMarples.com, a site set up by Richard Pope and Harry Metcalfe to help people find work, planning applications and health services through a series of sites using the PAF.  They have had to shut down the site.

Tom Watson MP, whilst a minister, had already started a conversation with the Royal Mail about freeing up the data for the nation and he has written again to Adam Crozier asking him to apply his "considerable talents" to find a solution.,  He is also raising the issue with ministers next week in Parliament.

I've written to Ken Clarke MP and John Thurso MP, who are the Shadow Business ministers for the Conservatives and LibDems, to add their support and make it a cross-party effort.  Why don't you do the same?

Here is what I wrote: 

Gentlemen,

The Royal Mail as the legal owner of the Postcode Address File recently sent a Cease and Desist letter to the owners of a company called ErnestMarples.com. The company was using the PAF to provide free services to citizens looking for work through JobCentreProPlus.com and to find what Planning Applications were being made in their area through PlanningAlerts.com. It is a not-for-profit company. More information is at: http://ernestmarples.com/blog/

It is the belief of many people in this country that the PAF is a national asset that should be made freely available. In doing so the revenue and savings from the innovation unleashed will far outweigh the £11 million income being made by the Royal Mail.

Tom Watson MP started a conversation with the Royal Mail whilst he was a minister, has written to Adam Crozier, and is raising the subject with ministers next week. I am asking you to also write to Adam Crozier to make it clear that all political parties are in favour of freeing up this extremely valuable asset. Tom's letter can be found at: http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2009/10/postcodes-adam-crozier-letter/

If you do not agree with the points being made I would appreciate an answer to explain why.

Kind regards,

Shane

Virtual Worlds & Councils

There has been some conversation about what role a virtual world such as Second Life should play in a council's engagement strategy.

I'm a sceptic myself.  You need to download and install special software, you need a beefed-up computer, the controls are far from intuitive, and the sight of clothed cats and semi-naked people is somewhat off-putting for serious use.

Still in the IDeA Community of Practice for Social Media there are some fans.  Top comment thought came from Justin Kerr Stevens of extended reach:

Personally, I'd prefer to see my local council in virtual world more akin to world of warcraft... I think I'd be able to make a few more salient points that way.

As you can imagine World of Warcraft is more about disengaging limbs from citizens than engaging citizens with democracy.  I suspect Justin is among the majority.

Listen Up

Jeremy Gould, the Whitehall Webby, has posted Part Two of his Six Approaches for Social Media Adoption in Govt. - Listening.

It is a critical and oft overlooked aspect of using Social Media.  The inclination is that because the tools are so easy to set up and use, we can just get out there and communicate.  It was the first mistake we made on the CivicSurf project.  We got the Cllrs up and blogging as quickly as we could without stopping and telling them to look around and read what is already going on.

We've recently experimented with Netvibes as a way of setting up dashboards, but found them a little limiting.  So we're developing something a little more attuned to our needs.  More news soon.

The other aspect of listening is that it does take time.  Finding and setting up RSS feeds probably comes naturally to those of you reading this in Google Reader, but converting email alerts and updated static pages into RSS feeds is a little trickier, but the biggest barrier to many is that they don't have the time.   Imagine you're in Cambridge.  A Google Blog search throws up some Cambridge, UK items, but also a fair bit of Cambridge, MA, and even Cambridge, ON.  People who aren't attuned to reading RSS feeds can benefit from some editorialisation and fine-tuning of feeds.

So, Jeremy's right more listening is needed and we need to make it easier to listen.  As the trail-blazing Steph Gray says in comments we do need to accept a noise-to-signal ratio we should try to reduce it.  He also points out that listening hasn't had the best take-up in his department and that is understandable.  It isn't that exciting unless you can actually start shouting about what you are reading.

Show us a better way, says UK Govt

Plain English, £20,000 prize fund for development, minimal rules, transparency.  Surely this can't be government?  But it is.

The Power of Information Task Force has launched a competition to get good ideas from the public on how best to reuse public information.

Brilliant.  Well Done.  Click on the button and go.

Sidewalks for Democracy Online

Steven Clift has written an essay outlining his wish-list for redesigning online democracy.

The central idea is:

"The typical e-government experience is like walking into a barren room with a small glass window, a singular experience to the exclusion of other community members.”

I agree.  You're looking at something online and you don't know if you're alone in seeing it, if you're alone in your view of it's impact, you're alone when you want to talk to someone about it.

Steven proposes that government website pages should have "limited public forums" so that people can meet on the "sidewalk" and discuss what they've be reading/doing.  Why not ensure that every page has a comments feature?  Make registration a requirement to help weed out the abuse, but let people talk about their government together.

It's a great idea that needs a cultural change in government.  Let's start with DirectGov.  Shouldn't be a problem.

Conference Live Blogging

David Wilcox and I walked down the Embankment last summer and talked about his idea for social reporting.  This spring it has gathered some momentum and today he and Dave Briggs are at the Digital Inclusion Conference at the Brewery in London.

They have created a site to provide some coverage of the event.  At the moment it consists mostly of videos recorded by David and uploaded by Dave.

You get some sense of what the event is like and does serve a purpose. For example David tries on a glove designed to replicate what it is like to be an arthritis sufferer.  It's good to see new stuff.  Kevin Carey gives an interesting view on digital inclusion and bemoans the focus on PCs rather than phones.

BUT, there are too many talking heads; there is no live feed although Public-i were webcasting apparently; and the live blogging aspect isn't really there.  Come on Dave's let's hear something about the conference.  What's the purpose?  Who is buzzing?  Was it worth paying £295 to attend (not very inclusive - VAT was extra)?  What have you learnt today? 

"ICELE - What is it for?"

Professor Stephen Coleman is getting into his blogging. Yesterday he questioned the role of ICELE and the comments section has hotted up awaiting the arrival of someone to represent ICELE.

Professor Coleman feels that ICELE has produced very little (and the little they have produced seems to be quite well hidden) despite being well-funded.  There didn't seem to be much defence of ICELE in the comments so I jumped in to point the finger at the conditions under which they were created and the role that VOICE had to play in diverting resources and focus from general e-democracy research and promotion.

No 10 Twitters and Flickrs into life

Having recently dipped my toe into the TwitterWorld (or whatever it is called) my attention (h/t Simon Dickson) was drawn to the new Twitttering from no.10 who then today drew my attention to their new Flickr account.

Personally I'm not sure about Twitter.  I think it is because it is so new that established norms for using it haven't developed.  Some people use it instead of IM, others for press releases, and some for getting information out and in v quickly.  Some are witty, some are dry.  However it is undeniably very 2008 and so it's good to see Downing Street start to use it even if it is only for publicising their RSS feeds for now.  I'm sure it will develop.

Also they have finally started to use Flickr, but I'm not sure why.  It's not as though they have a problem with photo hosting and since they have posted the pictures with all rights reserved they're not exactly doing the sharing bit.  Surely posting under a creative commons licence that allowed ordinary folk to use the pictures would have been better?