EU Parliament Monitor - 19/12/08

European Parliament questions Sony BMG merger
"The indie sector has been given renewed hope that the Sony BMG merger story hasn’t ended following the European Parliament’s decision to ask the EC competition commissioner to justify her decision to approve the merger of the two majors in 2004.

The European Parliament has fired off three questions to Neelie Kroes challenging the Commission about competition in the music market. The questions are:

- Why did the Commission not carry out an in-depth investigation when it adopted its last approval decision?
- What is the Commission's strategy for making sure that SMEs have market access in concentrated sectors like music?
- Will the Commission adopt new rules or guidelines on how competition policy should be adapted to cultural markets such as music?

The commissioner has six weeks to provide a written explanation, although it is unclear what action Parliament can take if it doesn’t like her answers. Meanwhile, European indie organisation IMPALA is still appealing the original EC decisions allowing Sony and BMG to merge, which led to an appeal in the Court of First Instance. An IMPALA spokesman says that the move by Parliament is quite rare and it means Kroes has to justify her decision.
SonyBMG were not commenting." [MusicWeek]

European Parliament questions Sony BMG approvals
"The elected European Parliament has challenged the European Commission about it's speedy decision earlier this year to allow Sony Music to buy Bertelsmann out of the two companies' joint venture record company, SonyBMG, which put the second biggest music firm in the world into the ownership of one organisation, Sony Corp.

They also question the Commission's wider policy regarding allowing such big companies to be created in the music and cultural industries without safeguards to protect smaller independent firms - in essence questioning the approval of the SonyBMG merger in the first place.

As much previously reported, the merger of Sony Corp and Bertlesmann's respective record companies to create SonyBMG in 2004 was not without controversy. Pan-European indie label trade body IMPALA said the creation of a company as big as SonyBMG was anti-competitive and should not be approved by the Commission (who have the power to block such deals). When the Commission then OKed the merger, without conditions, IMPALA went to the European Courts who ruled in the trade body's favour, agreeing that the Commission had failed to sufficiently investigate the merger before giving it the green light and ordering them to reinvestigate the proposals. That they did, subsequently approving the merger for a second time. IMPALA are currently appealing that Commission decision too." [CMUDaily]

European Parliament challenges the Commission again about competition in the music market and the SonyBMG merger, as independents’ appeal continues without new action over Sony buy out
"The European Parliament has challenged the European Commission for the third time over SonyBMG. The EC Commissioner for Competition, Neelie Kroes has six weeks to provide a written explanation regarding:

1. Why the Commission did not carry out an in-depth investigation when it adopted its last approval decision?
2. What the Commission's strategy is for making sure that SMEs have market access in concentrated sectors like music?
3. Whether the Commission will adopt new rules or guidelines on how competition policy should be adapted to the specificities of cultural markets such as music?

In the meantime IMPALA will continue its initial appeal regarding SonyBMG. In September the European Commission approved the buy out by Sony of Bertelsmann's shares in the joint venture SonyBMG and IMPALA objected because no remedies were put in place and there was no detailed investigation. As IMPALA is still in litigation over the creation of SonyBMG in the first place, however, it will not launch a new appeal over the buy out. IMPALA's concerns mainly relate to the market power of SonyBMG (and the other majors) rather than who owns it. IMPALA's appeal in the European courts will be heard again by the judges next year. IMPALA also appealed the EC's second approval decision and this case is on hold while the appeal against the first approval is being dealt with." [RecordOftheDay]

Christa Prets MEP on media literacy in a digital world: MEP Christa Prets wants more "digital education"
"We all need to better understand the media we are touched by daily, especially the young, says Austrian Socialist Christa Prets. MEPs backed her report on "media literacy in a digital world" on Tuesday. In an exclusive interview Ms Prets explained to us what media literacy actually is, how we can improve it and how it can be used to teach the young." [Europa]

EU Events: October 2008 Monitoring

The Internet Summit Austria 2008
02 October 2008, Vienna, Austria
"e-Inclusion" is the leading theme of the conference, which will be a meeting of minds of the leading thinkers and major architects of the internet and the digital society today. Their range of experience will cover all aspects of e-Inclusion like e-Accessibility, Ageing, e-Competences, Socio-Cultural e-Inclusion, Spatial e-Inclusion, Inclusive e-government and broadband for all.
This event takes place in preparation for the European e-Inclusion Ministerial Conference 2008 in Vienna and is supported by the Federal Chancellery of Austria. The audience will consist of the top 300 CEOs, academics, administration and politicians of Austria and some European countries.
ISPA (Internet Service Providers Austria) is a non-profit organisation dedicated to advance the usage of the Internet in Austria. [Europa]

Internet of Things - Internet of the Future
6 - 7 October 2008, Nice Acropolis (France)

eGovernment for Regions at Open Days 2008
to be held 7th October 2008, Brussels, Belgium
This workshop, organized during the Open Days 2008 European Week of Regions and Cities, will look at current EU initiatives and activities in the eGovernment area and how they can benefit regions and municipalities. [Europa]

The conference will concentrate on the following 2 areas:
1. aspects related to the development of the mobile Internet
2. the industrial and technological perspectives necessary for the development of the 'Internet of Things'

The aim is to identify and discuss the technological state-of-the-art, future trends, as well as opportunities and challenges, and draw a comprehensive picture of how the Internet of Things will change our interactions with objects. [Internet2008]

Ministerial Conference on the Internet of the Future
8th October 2008 [Europa]

Towards Future Media Internet
13 - 15 October 2008, Saint-Malo, France
This event aims to be a major conference and exhibition devoted to the field of Networked and Electronic Media (NEM) and ICT at large. It will provide an opportunity to network and share information and viewpoints on R&D status and perspectives in this area. It is organised by the NEM platform, one of the European Industrial Initiatives, also known as Technology Platforms. The NEM Platform is established by key European stakeholders, addressing the convergence of media, communications, consumer electronics, and IT as a wide opportunity for future growth, by taking advantage of generalised broadband access, increased mobility, availability of rich media formats and contents, as well as new home networks and communications platforms. [Europa]

An industrial property rights strategy for Europe, Strasbourg, 16-17.10.2008
A strong industrial property rights system is a driving force for innovation, stimulating R&D investment and facilitating the transfer of knowledge from the laboratory to the marketplace. On 16 July 2008, the Commission adopted a Communication on an industrial property rights strategy for Europe which outlines actions to ensure Europe has a high quality industrial property rights system in the years to come. The Communication provides a horizontal strategy across the spectrum of different industrial property rights and includes initiatives on enforcement, innovation support for small and medium-sized enterprises, and the quality of industrial property rights. It complements the 2007 Communication on the patent system, which set out a way forward towards the adoption of a Community patent and an integrated EU-wide jurisdiction for patents. [Europa]

Second European Summit on Interoperability in the iGovernment
20 - 22 October 2008, Rome, Italy
This event will offer a forum to develop new strategies, to network and build synergies between participants. These will include representatives from the European Commission, national and regional governments, researchers, academics and ICT experts. The Summit aims to : analyze the European Interoperability Framework produced by IDABC ; verify the state of the art in Interoperability in Europe ; involve International and national stakeholders on interoperability, in order to define new priorities and to develop more innovative and efficient electronic services. [Europa]

World Standards Day 2008 conference: "Standardisation and SMEs: a challenge for Europe; what are the keys to success?" Paris, 21 October 2008
On the occasion of World Standards Day 2008, the French Presidency of the Council of the European Union, in cooperation with the European Commission, will organise a one-day conference about standardisation.
...

Entrepreneurs, organisations representing SMEs, the national standards bodies, administrations and other interested parties will meet on 21st October 2008 in Paris in order to share their experiences and throw new light on the strategic importance of standardisation for SMEs, the challenges ahead and the solutions which work. [Europa]

2nd Europe INNOVA Conference - Accelerating Innovation
The Europe INNOVA Conference 2008 will focus on accelerating innovation in Europe and how to optimise knowledge transfer, strengthening industry's innovation capacity through strategic partnerships and supporting innovative entrepreneurs. 22nd – 24th October 2008 [Europa]

The UK and eGovernment: Chapter VI, Conclusion

The UK Government has been successful at preparing the ground for future eGovernment projects through establishing a large telecommunications infrastructure, enabling citizens and business to access high speed broadband However, its emphasis on building on contemporary processes of government rather than using it as an opportunity for reform has resulted in it being less innovative compared to countries such as Canada and Finland. Their greater emphasis on interactive, citizen-centric and transformative government has resulted in a higher level of use of eGovernment compared to the informative but one sided approach adopted by UK government websites. The Government has slowly come to realise this problem, with new initiatives such as The Digital Challenge and more recently Transformational Government, which aims to put customer centric services, shared services and professionalism at the heart of UK policymaking through promoting technology advisors on a par with policy, legal, statistic or economic advisors.[1]

There needs to be a concerted ongoing effort to educate the population about the benefits of the Internet in general use and their interaction with government services such as ‘One Stop Shops’. Without this expensive projects will be underused, reducing the growth of future beneficial projects. Expensive marketing campaigns do not appear to work so well, with people preferring to use more standard but inefficient processes such as Google to find their information, making it important for new approaches.

Government drives to encourage use of computers should foster greater confidence in the Internet. As users start to learn more they must be made aware of the options available to them and the benefits. The use of online centres and courses tailored to local needs appears to be working but the investment put in place appears to be very short-term and is already starting to eat away at other projects budgets as funding is drying up. We are still a long way away from making the UK population confident with using the Internet, let alone creating sufficient demand for government services online. The hope that market forces will make everybody consider the Internet to be treated as a common utility is very strong among policymakers. However, if we don’t sustain investment in ensuring that everybody is part of the knowledge economy then it may take a long time before the ‘Digital Divide’ closes.

The coming trajectory of eGovernment is not so clear cut, with policymakers more content to maintain existing practices than face the difficulties of transformational government starting losing momentum for further reforms. To build on the successes of previous projects will require a higher level of effort and a greater commitment to change organisational structures and processes. The future of eGovernment will become increasingly ideological and challenging to the public sector and the relationship between government organisations, citizens and business and will be as great a challenge to public policy as New Public Management and Deregulation did in the last twenty years. This will occur especially in regards to how much the public sector invests in projects, who provides online service, how it is funded and how society will deal with the ‘Digital Divide’. The benefits from countries using more advanced eGovernment strategies are becoming increasingly apparent. However, it is not too late to catch up in order to fully modernise government.

Written by Jonathan McHugh inJune 2007.

Part of Electronic Horizon: An Examination of the Importance of eGovernment and the UK Governments Approach to ICT, the Internet and its Impact on Modern Government

---

[1] Transformational Government (Cabinet Office) 2007

The UK and eGovernment: Chapter V, The Digital Divide

Around 40 percent of adults in the UK have no experience of using a computer and only 50 percent of homes have some kind of access to the Internet. [1] One report even goes far enough to suggest that over 140,000 families are at risk of being excluded by the fast development of the knowledge economy. This even extends to more successful UK cities, with a third of Londoners lacking skills and living in ‘skills poverty’. [2]

Dugdale, Daly et al suggest that this is “one of the leading challenges to the success of e-government is the lack of participation in the information society by those groups in the population who are the biggest users of government services.” [3]

The factors creating this Digital Divide are the same historic factors of social exclusion, namely income, employment and age.

Although the costs of PCs and the Internet are becoming increasingly competitive, there are still a large number of people for which these are unaffordable. Efforts to improve equality of access through PCs in libraries and centres help but are unable to fully solve this problem. For example, for socially excluded groups only 6 percent had Internet access at work compared to 38 percent for all UK users found by an ONS study. [4] Initiatives to encourage employers to increase access to the Internet and ICT training in the workplace should be encouraged, particularly areas with higher incidences of social exclusion.

The most significant factor is age. Older people have lived the majority of their life without going online and many are indifferent to the benefits, despite the potential benefits to them.

There is much debate as to whether the Internet will exaggerate existing social trends, with the more dynamic in society reaping the benefits of technological development, leaving the least off behind, or whether the advancement of broadband and development of technology into all areas of society will eventually make everybody proficient.

For Bourdieu, theories of social reproduction suggest that technological innovation and change unwittingly reinforce existing social power relations and modes of consciousness that legitimises those relations.[5] In the context of the Internet, the socially deprived have limited opportunities to familiarise themselves with technology they stand a greater chance of being left behind by others who are able to benefit from technological advances. GLA research has voiced concerns following research into the Digital Divide that it does still exist and that there is a risk that it will widen rather than reduce, if appropriate measures are not adopted to avoid it. [6]

On the other hand, many consider the growth of broadband and its application in all areas of life in the future will make the Digital Divide disappear. London Connects takes the optimistic approach, considering that this will happen through market forces and intervention by the year 2012, in time for the Smart City Vision.

In regards to the development of eDemocracy, whereby people on the Internet are able to form part of the decision-making process any Digital Divide could have consequences to the form of Democracy in the future. Jenson voices concerns that without significant equality of use and appropriate regulation online public spheres will end up becoming the coffee houses of the eighteenth century. [7] This concern is backed up by Torres, Pina and Acrete, who feel that despite increased government transparency, efficiency and customer orientated service delivery that “technology is behaving as an enabler within pre-existing social and political structures.”[8] However, Jenson still is aware that the opportunity for new media helps to provide “citizens with enhanced possibilities for gaining information and communicating with politicians, which altogether might potentially lead to a revitalisation of the public sphere.” [9]

As Warscauer points out, there is no overriding factor for determining or closing such a divide, as it is “woven into social systems and processes.” To deal with this he argues that this involves “not only providing computers and Internet links or shifting to online patterns but also developing relevant content in diverse languages, promoting literacy and education and mobilising community and institutional support toward achieving community goals.”[10]

One of the main concerns for people attempting to counteract symptoms of deprivation is that ICT is often not articulated in any meaningful or coherent way. For example, in London there is no evidence or data with which to measure local demand for ICT which makes it difficult for policymakers to support and continue ICT projects, as it is difficult to make business cases from their budget or apply for government grants.

Reaching Out to Disadvantaged Group

There is no ‘one size fits all’ approach to encouraging use of the Internet, with experience showing that a careful understanding of target groups and their needs is critical to any project success. This approach is likely to benefit local authorities rather than central government, given their greater contact and understanding of constituents’ issues.

The route to users buying computers at home is usually two stage. Firstly, people experiment with the Internet in public access points. This usually lasted a couple of months, with only 26 percent of participants using the Internet for less than twelve months having access from home. [11] If people purchase a computer later it is because their greater use has made then more aware of its benefits.

Where participants use the Internet [12]

Centres
The UK has been successful at creating an infrastructure for everybody to have the opportunity to access the Internet, such as through a network of over 6000 UK Online centres, providing community-based access and learning points.[13] Also, the Peoples Network Initiative (PNI), a National Lottery initiative has helped to invest £120 million in key frontline services[14] through putting computers in every library in the country.

Research has found that these centres and IT facilities have played a very important role in assisting socially excluded groups to get online. Clayton considers that with 340 million visits a year public libraries are the biggest generator in ‘customer capital’ in the local public sector. [15] The interest from many in learning how to use computers from many people who lacked basic literacy skills was a major encouragement for such centres, as the curiosity factor was enough to initiate self betterment from some. One poll on the effect of informal ICT learning from library users was highly positive, with:

51 percent ending up having the Internet at home

42 percent making online purchases

77 percent becoming more interested and confident in working

36 percent applying for a job or starting up a business

40 percent finding a job

48 percent progressing to accredited training courses[16]

However, there are concerns for the infrastructure. Firstly, many of these centres lack of scale or size has left them unable to develop their activities sufficiently. A more concerning development has been the lack of long-term funding for computing equipment, as the PNI investment was one off. The cost of sustaining computers, including upgrades, servicing and software licensing is getting to the point where libraries are having to make the difficult choice between scaling back the number of computers available or cut funding in books. Clayton and Hepworth consider part of this funding crisis to be as a result of libraries ‘falling between the cracks or silos’, between the DfES, DCMS, and ODPM nationally, and between council departments and partnership agencies locally and regionally. [17]

There have been a number of concerns raised by participants that there is a bewildering array of Internet training and skills development courses offered by ICT centres and learning centres. Some policymakers have suggested that one way to deal with this is to create a Public Resource Centre to provide a unified front to people enquiring for courses and shared access to resources such as staff training, mentoring, equipment and the development of best practices.

Support Structures
There have been a range of support services introduced to different communities beyond just installing centres. These often reflect the communities individual characteristics.

For example, in Westminster councillors noticed a lack of interest from its Bengali community in its libraries. To counteract this they hired an outreach worker who could speak Bengali in order to teach ICT courses. This was a huge success, with over 59 percent of the Bengali community becoming active library users, particularly women, far higher than the 5 percent target envisaged. The library involved has now become the main point of access to community services of the Bengali community in Westminster and has now helped many to get onto the jobs market.

The importance of community-based advocates of Internet technology has slowly been realised. Research has found that many new Internet users are keen to volunteer and to assist others to start using the Internet. They would be useful in buddy schemes or to lead groups to help reduce the stigma of not understanding computers and provide role models to demonstrate the advantages of ICT. Demand for such existing schemes is high and appears to be a cost effective way to reach out to people. However, they need much support and perhaps training in order to reach out and increase awareness of ICT effectively.

Creating forums between businesses and getting them into the same room in order to encourage their use of ICTs and promoting partnerships should greatly increase the strength of UK ICT companies. For example, Brixton Online, a social entrepreneurship works with approximately 150 to 200 businesses a year, providing consultations, ICT packages and workshops to encourage young businesses to embrace ICT.

Encouraging social entrepreneurship is a useful way of building partnerships within the community. For example, the Mayor of London works in partnership with Maxitech to refurbish computers and redistribute them to Age Concern centres in the capital.

Projects
Shoreditch is at the centre of London’s Smart City plan for 2012. Currently it suffers from being one of Europe’s most deprived areas, with 40 percent of people economically inactive despite having over one thousand SMEs located in an area less than the size of two local authority wards.[18] However, due to massive levels of investment coordinated with the Mayor of London’s investment in the East End it should become the largest ICT literate broadband community in Europe, covering over twenty thousand residents and its businesses. [19]

The network offers an ultra high speed broadband connection five times faster than regular lines. It will offer households:

· Entertainment e.g. digital TV, video on demand, network games, music file sharing

· Welfare to work e.g. Online NVQ courses, basic skills, English as a Second Language courses, local jobs website

· Consumer e.g. local ‘e-bay’ and ‘Loot’ services, online group buying for utilities, repair reporting to local authority, approved list of personal service suppliers like childcare, plumbers, carpenters etc.

· Security e.g. online webcam CCTV across the estates that can be monitored by residents in their homes, through the Network

· Community information e.g. GP Surgery opening times, GP bookings, benefits entitlements

· Communications e.g. free local phone calls, e-mail, PC applications like MS Office and internet explorer, community chat rooms, community voting

For businesses, especially SMEs it will include:

· Network services e.g. latest versions of MS Office, Sage, specialist software needed by knowledge economy enterprises, backup of files on network drive

· Security e.g. Online webcam CCTV, monitoring premises and surrounding areas, that can be viewed by SMEs over the network. Panic buttons and security systems, enabled by the high speed connection.

· Business support e.g. award winning online support packages developed by London Met University New Media lab, online premises matching services, online loan finance through ShOW’s SME loan development fund

· Business services e.g. approved lists of service suppliers such as Accountants, Legal, HR etc.; online group buying of common services such as utilities, online sector forums and networking areas

There will very generous introductory offers to encourage initial uptake. Although there will be a subscription to the service in order to guarantee its long-term sustainability the large economies involved are expected to save households £300 a year.

This investment examines the strengths of weaknesses and creates a framework that should be successful both socially and efficiently at transforming the region.

Written by Jonathan McHugh in June 2007.

Part of Electronic Horizon: An Examination of the Importance of eGovernment and the UK Governments Approach to ICT, the Internet and its Impact on Modern Government

---

[1] Acting now to provide for an exciting future (Western Morning News) September 14, 2006

[2] The London Knowledge Economy (Knowledge Economy Network) 2006 p. 6E

[3] A. Dugdale, A. Daly et al Accessing e-government: challenges for citizens and Organizations (International Review of Administrative Sciences) 2005 p116-7

[4] P Foley, X Alfonso, et al Connecting people: tackling exclusion? An examination of the impact on and use of the Internet by socially excluded groups in London (Greater London Authority) 2006 p. 8

[5] R. Morrow C. Torres Social Theory and Education: A Critique of Theories of Social and Cultural Reproduction. (New York Press) 1995

[6] The digital divide in a world city, GLA, June 2002

[7] J. Jensen Public Spheres on the Internet: Anarchic or Government-Sponsored – A Comparison (Scandinavian Political Studies, Vol. 26 – No. 4) 2003 p350

[8] L. Torres, V. Pina, and B. Acerete E-Governance Developments in European Union Cities: Reshaping Government’s Relationship with Citizens (Blackwell Publishing) 2006 p. 300

[9] J. Jensen Public Spheres on the Internet: Anarchic or Government-Sponsored – A Comparison (Scandinavian Political Studies, Vol. 26 – No. 4) 2003 p349

[10] M. Warschauer Technology and Social Inclusion: Rethinking the Digital Divide (MIT Press) 2003 p. 39

[11] P Foley, X Alfonso, et al Connecting people: tackling exclusion? An examination of the impact on and use of the Internet by socially excluded groups in London (Greater London Authority) 2006 p. 7

[12] P Foley, X Alfonso, et al Connecting people: tackling exclusion? An examination of the impact on and use of the Internet by socially excluded groups in London (Greater London Authority) 2006 p. 38

[13] G. Kuk The Digital Divide and the Quality of Electronic Service Delivery in Local Government in the United Kingdom (Government Information Quarterly) 2002 p. 355

[14] N. Clayton and M. Hepworth Public Libraries in the Knowledge Economy (Museums, Libraries and Archives Council) 2006 p. 64

[15] N. Clayton and M. Hepworth Public Libraries in the Knowledge Economy (Museums, Libraries and Archives Council) 2006 p. 7

[16] N. Clayton and M. Hepworth Public Libraries in the Knowledge Economy (Museums, Libraries and Archives Council) 2006 p. 64

[17] N. Clayton and M. Hepworth Public Libraries in the Knowledge Economy (Museums, Libraries and Archives Council) 2006 p. 65

[18] Shoreditch: The Digital Bridge

[19] Shoreditch: The Digital Bridge

The UK and eGovernment: Chapter IV, Successes and Failures of IT Projects

Over £6 billion has been invested in ICT and eGovernment projects over the last couple of years[1] to raise the productivity and service delivery of government. However, the uniqueness of each project as a result of differing needs throws up the need for a flexible approach to planning, with no one successful model emerging. Due to budgetary constraints and the increasing maturity of eGovernment the spending on such future projects is likely to be constrained in the next few years, so it is important to highlight the successes and failures of government initiatives in order to encourage further development of the eGovernment project.

Successful projects, such as Liverpool integrating its new and old council systems, including HR, payroll systems, employees secondments, benefits provision and call centre operations and unifying them in one support structure has enabled the borough to make significant savings and an improved level of service.

There needs to be more groups that can act as a forum and mediator between stakeholders for eGovernment projects. A successful example of this is London Connects, a pan-London group that fosters the spirit of discussion and cooperation to share expertise, experience and costs in medium and large scale projects. This is very useful, as smaller organisations and boroughs are unlikely to benefit from the scale necessary to justify large project expenditures.

The UK Government needs to create a more positive infrastructure for collaborative projects, through putting a greater emphasis on cooperative funding mechanisms, such as coordinated bids for new initiatives and the pooling of resources. Recently the Government has launched the Digital Challenge, involving a £6 million grant for one region and £200 thousand each to nine others. It has helped to create a unique incentive for a region, city or smaller sized area to introduce joined-up technology reforms to meet the needs of their local community and individual citizens. This major investment goes further then fostering best practice for ‘eGovernment champions’, as the structure of the grants should help to encourage the Digital Challenge finalists and the winner to work together and with central government to pool practices in order to tackle social exclusion and be exemplars in their field.

More modern and integrated systems and processes allow collaboration “more effectively across agencies to address complex , shared problems.”[2] This allows local and social contexts to be better understood, “without which the effective governance of multi-agency networks would not be feasible.”[3] For example, the use of MADE data has enabled one town to identify that the top two wards for crime were also the top two for fire and ambulance incidents, with a similar pattern being replicated across all districts. This resulted in a multi agency ‘vulnerability index’ being created using a variety of indicators previously unavailable. This has permitted a greater understanding of local regions and better informed policymaking decisions.

There have been a number of assertions by the media of the waste and inefficiencies of the UK’s eGovernment project, with some sources going so far as to suggest that over 70% of ICT projects fail. [4] For example, the Computer Government Survey claimed that £1.5 billion has been ‘wasted’ in government IT projects since 1997.[5] However, a lot of these projects are associated with reform of public policy as well as infrastructure. These reforms can increase implementation and support costs, as well as the risk of project failure. Despite this the benefits in the long-run will outweigh the short-term costs. For example, once groups get through the initial change involved in introducing CRM, 66 percent of council IT managers surveyed now use the technology. Three-quarters of them consider the CRM has helped to improve efficiency levels in their authority. [6]

Many departments are unwilling to reform their department’s information systems and often ignore the benefits from overcoming current ‘Back Office’ inefficiencies. The current framework is based on the old assumption that agencies work alone. This has led to numerous processes that may increase individual agency efficiencies but at the expense of greater cross agency benefits.

The over ambition of policymakers can easily blind their decision-making, resulting in overspending on grand projects which fail to live up to their expectations. Swansea Council’s £84 million ICT project failed, with its expectations of £50 million savings very quickly scaled back to £26 million. Even then only £7.4 million has been identified so far. [7]

Whereas councils such as Hertfordshire Council who recently signed a £25 million deal agreed a more ‘finely diced’ deal, Swansea was complacent in having defined goals for its contractor. Swansea’s emphasis on outsourcing rather than forming a partnership opened it to a greater level of risk.

Eventually the plans had to be split into two parts and reduced in scale. The second part, which had included the modern call centre which could handle 80 per cent of all inquiries in its first call was reduced to a face to face centre and email system.

A current project concern is the largest ICT development in the world, the development of the NHS’s IT systems. The developers have struggled to create a secure and effective system to support 60 percent of Britain’s GP practices and hospital trusts on time. A recent review highlighted that 13 out of 39 matters relating to Lorenzo, the company in charge of the project as ‘red’, meaning that they required immediate work. [8]

A concern with policymakers is the choice of platform to introduce and build upon. For example, the use of smartcards in London is at a crossroads. There is talk of building on the success of the Oyster cards, which are used to take public transport and can benefit transport policymakers, as it can highlight transport trends of its users so that more joined-up transport links can be initiated. For example, it could be used to deliver payment services for the 2012 Olympic Games or as a unified access card for services across London. However, many sceptics question the smartcard’s value, especially considering the level of data pooling and cleansing involved. Some consider it would be far more practical to use a single sign on password system to access council services.

Concerns have been raised over the public sector’s enthusiasm for data sharing. It is felt by some that “public trust and confidence may well be jeopardised with any wholesale or unrestrained sharing of personal information." [9] For instance, the Serious Crime Bill would allow public and private sector anti-fraud agencies to access personal financial information, including pay, tax, pension and benefit records held across the public sector. This is as a result of the overturning of the principle that personal information provided to a government department for one purpose should, in general, not be used for another. Now government officials “will be able to assume that data can be shared unless there are reasons not to disclose it.” [10] If the public was to consider the level of data sharing to be an intrusion into personal privacy then it would be seriously counter productive to the project.

Despite the major difficulties involved the UK must press ahead in its reforms to the public sector, built around the utility of technology and the demands of citizens. However, it must adopt a more careful approach to reform than previously.

Criteria for Success

Given the aforementioned difficulties in complex eGovernment projects, the adaptation of new technological advancements “requires a careful investigation into the philosophy, structure and productive processes of the public organisations participating in eGovernment.”[11] Such a holistic view requires consistently considering public administration “as a socio-technical system and, as such, as a unit of: individual citizens, employees of authorities and governments, groups and society, technical and information systems, norms and laws, social and cultural practices, moral and ethics and natural environmental issues.” [12]

Diagram: eGovernment Application Layers[13]

To create a successful vision and strategies it is important to involve all stakeholders and ensure that the leadership is participating in the decision making powers and that they are committed to cooperating and relaying decisions to all areas of their organisation. Regular meetings between policymakers helps to acknowledge and deal with the strain created as a result of difficult reforms. A project website, where project information can be shared and ideas explored is highly recommended to aid policymaking.

During meetings to establish a common information platform or to pool information it is important to define user requirements, highlighting what information partners require, when they need it and to explore product design issues. To speed up the process it is beneficial to divide people into ‘syndicated groups’ to consider questions regarding datasets more time effective. Timetabling when structures are to be put in place and when information available is useful at focusing policymakers.

One of the major stumbling blocks to such processes is the intellectual inability of many participating members to recognise the utility of data to support collaborative decision-making, compounded by the low level of human resource available for analytic work. These weaknesses and ‘organisational shame’ can be masked by an unwillingness to share data or make major concessions. For instance, the demands to create a data sharing protocol or issues over data protection may be deliberate attempts to disrupt reciprocity between organisations.

When looking into the practicalities for introducing the project it is important to have defined goals with every contractor. For example, Swansea Council’s emphasis on outsourcing rather than forming a partnership opened it up to a greater level of risk. A successful example of a partnership was the joint venture between Liverpool City Council and BT for five years. The success of BT running the council’s call centre, revenues and benefits, HR and IT services resulted in the contract being extended until 2017, as a result of achieved savings and stability.

This system helped to avoid the animosity between management and council employees, as the staff were still under the control of the council. In Swansea the renegotiation of the contract for the council staff to work for the company Capgemini resulted in an eighteen month strike by its IT staff, the largest in Welsh history. Clear HRM policies should allow for “flexible remuneration and working conditions, for the development of teams, for performance management in the context of virtual and/or cross organisational teams for flexible working laws to deal with demand peaks and/or cross organisational teams for flexible working hours to deal with demand peaks and for job redesign to cover a broad range of customer need and government programmes.”[14]

The choice of software application is important to the final success of a project. There is little use introducing a powerful but complex information platform if conservative users are adverse to use it or exploit its full potential. Any attempt to use standard software tools such as Excel or include pre-packaged functionalities such as ward histograms is likely to be optimum, unless there is agreement over the utility of more expensive packages.

It is highly important that the risks of any project are laid out in advance so that they can be effectively addressed should the project run into difficulties. A framework for assessment should be used to evaluate the efficiency of any work. This can include qualitative as well as quantitative results, as the uniqueness of government means that social benefits can be equally important at justifying an initiative.

Modern Telephone System

Preferred Media for Communicating with Government,[15]

Despite the benefits of the Internet and keenness from some groups of the population research from the Oxford Internet Survey has confirmed the conservative nature of government communication. More traditional forms such as writing letters and face to face contact were chosen over email. This is backed up by a survey from Tickbox.net which values public sector websites as users most valuable between 9.6 percent (The South West) and 14.6% (London). [16]

In the short to medium term there will be limits to the amount of people who will use the Internet to access government services. One way of building on the one-stop shop platform is to integrate it with a telephone directory in order to reach out to citizens and business and be more time efficient and cost effective compared to person-to-person contact centres.

Even though people feel more secure using more traditional forms of contact the cost of supporting face-to-face centres and replying via letter is expensive. This financial benefit means that it is important to wean citizens into using more modern forms of communication, whether by email or telephone, using the SmartGov six factors cited earlier for increasing eGovernment use.

Which of the following types of website is most invaluable to your life?[17]

A concern with this level of investment is that people tend to prefer traditional methods and have not been offered enough incentives to develop a trust towards more interactive methods which they have very limited experience with. For example, reports suggest that only 70,000 people have used the Inland Revenue’s online assessment form[18] and only 41 percent of UK residents have used e-Government.[19] For example, Accenture found that there was only mild agreement that e-Government made government “more efficient, effective and accountable, saved money, and provided easier access and better service.”[20] This is almost certainly a reflection of the government’s emphasis on providing access to services online rather than promoting its use. For the time being these expensive projects aren’t being used effectively enough.

Borough Out of Hours Call Handling Service
In London despite the availability of daytime centres, online information, email and face to face arrangements there are still between 20 and 25 thousand out of hour telephone calls a year for each borough. This costs each borough £260 thousand annually to handle these enquiries.[21] These out of hour operations tend to provide access to a limited number of services and the cost per caller is higher as a result of a lower volume of callers.

Through combining the local authorities out of hours telephone services there are significant savings and the opportunity to improve the quality of service as a consequence of longer hours and a broader range of services offered. The project, which is about to be introduced is expected to cost between £50 and £75 thousand a year per borough but is expected to generate savings of £100 to £200 thousand each year for each borough. It will be working in anticipation of the forthcoming 101 for London Programme.[22]

101 for London Programme
The new 101 for London Programme is part of a nationwide DCLG/ Home Office initiative to provide a single number for non-emergency calls. It will cover core services such as vandalism and graffiti; noise pollution; intimidation and harassment; abandoned vehicles; fly tipping; drunkenness and rowdiness; drug related anti-social behaviour and street lighting issues. This system is being planned to integrate easily with the standards set by the forthcoming out of hours call handling service.

This is partly a response to the number of non-critical calls that the 999 service handles, with some statistics suggesting that 70 per cent are non-critical[23] However, this new service will help improve accessibility and increase demand by up to 30 per cent. [24]

mGovernment
As mobile communications becomes more popular over time there will be a movement from eGovernment, which is built upon the wired networks of interactive and relatively intelligent web design to mGovernment, where information can be shared via mobile phones, and computers connected to Wifi ports located in public spaces.

Norfolk has invested over £1.1 million on transmitters fixed on lamps throughout Norwich and shortly some villages to give the public and public servants wireless Internet (Wifi). [25]

Devon county has created the Devon in Touch Mobile Information System (DORIS), a van equipped with a satellite connection and computers. This will be used for events and as a support unit during emergencies, allowing emergency services to get access to their internal IT systems via the Internet.

General system architecture of the eGOV online one-stop Government platform.,[26]

Digital Television
While attention has been focused on the Internet as a platform for public service delivery, digital television may have a role in increasing contact. Television’s wider penetration familiarity may result it in being a useful tool for people with lack of access or confident with the Internet, or no interest.

The Office of the eEnvoy claims that “some of the social and demographic groups that have been slowest in Internet uptake are among those sectors of society Government most wishes to reach through remote public service access.”[27] This includes older people, the disabled and those from minority communities.

However, there are barriers to the take-up and utilisation of this type of service. For example, digital interactive television systems have been rated as lacking in user friendliness by expert analysis and in feedback from users themselves. [28]

UK Provision of eGovernment Services
The UK is relatively successful in terms of E-Government provision. The Government’s efforts to put as many government services online have resulted in the UK being ranked third in the UN’s report of E-Government readiness, behind the United States and Denmark, [29] ranking second, behind the United States on its willingness and ability to employ ICT for the provision of basic services[30] and behind the United States on the amount of online transactions.[31]

However, Accenture has raised a number of concerns in regards to the development of UK eGovernment. For example, despite having a large Internet penetration of 61%, it had a relatively low percentage of eGovernment users (41%), placing the UK in the category of developing eGovernment users.[32]

This is partly because there has not been enough emphasis on moving from the ‘billboard’ stage, where governments merely put up information on the Internet to an integrated stage where there is full participation between citizens, businesses and government and between government agencies. Apart from 24/7 access, the benefit of having information online is huge, as a result of drawing information together. For example, a computer can be programmed to request information online from users, retrieve records, process them, make decisions, inform citizens and make a transparent record of what has happened. [33] However, the UK’s limited interaction means that in many cases forms can be accessed and printed but not filled in online.

As a result the UK has underperformed in many international rankings, such as only being ranked 40^th by the UN on encouraging citizen participation,[34] 19^th on allowing feedback on policies[35] and 10th on providing online consultation facilities.[36] Accenture agrees with these criticisms, citing the UK as being 12^th on overall maturity scores as a result of poor service maturity breadth and depth (see bar chart 1 below),[37] taking into account citizen-centred, cross-governmental and multi channel interactions, as well as proactive communications and education. It is also ranked 16^th when including overall customer service maturity. This was felt to be as a result of a below average ranking framework in cross governmental interactions.

However, despite Accenture’s criticism, it does acknowledge the recent development of some of its many high profile programs would not have made a significant enough impact on its report as the time of writing.

Bar Chart A: 2005 Overall Maturity Scores[38]

The Four Elements of Customer Service Maturity[39]

Internet Penetration and eGovernment Use[40]

Regional Provision
City councils are critical of the effective level of eGovernment, as they are usually the tier of government nearest to the citizen and spend around 28% of Europe’s gross domestic product in providing their wide range of services.[41] Many UK cities are seen as being highly successful at providing eGovernment services.

A recent report (see table below) considered that UK cities were some of Europe’s most successful cities in terms of e-Governance, ranked Birmingham 1^st, London 4^th, Glasgow 5^th, Edinburgh 5^th and Sheffield 9^th.

[42]

The first principle category is eService, which includes the range of services (EsR) and the eService stage (esS) (such as Billboard, one way information, two way information and transactional). The second principle category, eDemocracy includes the political dimension (PD), the level of citizen dialogue (CD), the level of financial accountability (FA) and web maturity (WM). eGovernance is an amalgamation of all the factors.

Birmingham and Sheffield were associated as being part of the interact and transact category as a result of having an eService score greater than 35% because of the level of services that they provided through the Internet.

London, Glasgow and Edinburgh were put in the second class as their eService score was between 26% and 35%. Despite having a considerable amount of information online the majority of it was still either at the ‘billboard stage’ or ‘one way stage’.

Leeds and Belfast were ranked in the third and fourth categories, as they had little interaction and provided only a limited amount of information on their websites. These websites were considered late adopters which required major overhauls to improve their ability to communicate and most importantly interact with their citizens.

Both EU and UK Local governments are seen as using their Web sites mainly as a way to disseminate reports, rules, procedures, and other information about government decisions. This use of e-democracy facilities is quite similar to the billboard stage of e-service. It is an advance but it fails to take advantage of ICT’s potential for the transformation of the ways in which governments relate to citizens. Even the most successful cities were seen as being on the first rungs of development.

L. Torres, V. Pina and B. Acerete’s report highlights that Anglo Saxon and Nordic public administration styles are better suited to this style compared to the bureaucratic style of German and southern European styles. This is because “they are more concerned with customer needs than in the EU continental styles based on administrative laws and legal procedures.”[43]

However, there appears to be no apparent trends between public administration styles and eService developments (see bar chart below). The results show that Germanic and southern European cities are predominant in the first group of eService scores but also the last, whereas Anglo-Saxon cities plus Amsterdam are spread throughout the first three groups. This leads them to conclude that eService initiatives “fit well into any kind of public administration, especially at the billboard or interact – downloading stages, because they do not entail substantial changes in the style of the government-to-citizen (G2C) relationship.”[44]

Their final conclusion is that despite the claims at modernisation, most local governments are merely concerned with the “image of modernisation and responsiveness rather than with the introduction of real changes in the way in which public administrations interact with citizens.” [45]

The low interactivity of UK websites creates the impression that policymakers consider the public to be passive, unwilling to engage them and reluctant to allow them to influence policy and information. This may help to account for the lower eGovernment usage scores relative to the Internet user population. National and local governments cannot ignore these warnings. To deal with these shortcomings there needs to be a concrete idea over how government departments should operate and how they should interact with the public. It is clear that there needs to be an active change in order to reverse this trend and make the UK a trendsetter in eGovernment.

Written by Jonathan McHugh in June 2007.

Part of Electronic Horizon: An Examination of the Importance of eGovernment and the UK Governments Approach to ICT, the Internet and its Impact on Modern Government

---

[1] P. Foley, X. Alfonso, et al Connecting People: Tackling Exclusion? An Examination of the impact of the Internet by Socially Excluded Groups in London (Greater London Authority) 2006 p. 24

[2] The eGovernment Imperative (OECD) 2003

[3] D. Wastell, P Kawalek et al Information systems and partnership in multi-agency networks: an action research project in crime reduction (Information and Organization) 2004 p. 190

[4] ICT Making projects Work (Publictechnology.net) 2007

[5] Computing Government Survey 2003 www.vnunet.com/news/1139438

[6] Councils Learn To Cope With CRM Culture Shock (Computing) September 21, 2006

[7] Service@swansea is Total Shambles (South Wales Evening Post) March 3, 2007

[8] Doubts over NHS Computer System See iSoft Shares Fall (The Guardian) August 22 2006

[9] Can it always be good to share? (Computer Weekly) March 13, 2007

[10] Can it always be good to share? (Computer Weekly) March 13, 2007

[11] M. Wimmer A European perspective towards online one-stop government: the eGOV project (Electronic Commerce Research and Applications ) 2002 p. 93

[12] M. Wimmer A European perspective towards online one-stop government: the eGOV project (Electronic Commerce Research and Applications ) 2002 p. 95

[13] M. Wimmer A European perspective towards online one-stop government: the eGOV project (Electronic Commerce Research and Applications ) 2002 p. 93

[14] The eGovernment Imperative (OECD) 2003

[15] R. Rose A Global Diffusion Model of e-Governance (Cambridge University Press) 2005 p. 19

[16] DirectGov Internet Thinking (Tickbox.net) 2006

[17] DirectGov Internet Thinking (Tickbox.net) 2006

[18] SmartGov: Renewing Electronic Government for Improved Service Delivery Jul 2003 p10

[19] Cited from Accenture Leadership in Customer Service: New Expectations, New Experiences. Apr 2005 P95

[20] Accenture Leadership in Customer Service: New Expectations, New Experiences. Apr 2005 P95

[21] Survey for Out of Hours and Single Non-Emergency Number Projects May (London Connects) 6th July 2006

[22] London Connects Programme – Project Proposals 2006 (London Connects) 2006

[23] 101 for London – what’s it all about?

[24] 101 for London – what’s it all about?

[25] I have seen Wi-Fi's future, and it's free The Guardian October 12, 2006

[26] M. Wimmer A European perspective towards online one-stop government: the eGOV project (Electronic Commerce Research and Applications ) 2002 p. 97

[27] Digital Television: A Policy Framework for Delivering e-Government Services to the Home (Office of the e-Envoy) 2002

[28] B Gunter The Prospects for e-Government on Digital Television (New Information Perspectives Vol 56) 2004 p. 224

[29] Cited from UN E-Government Readiness Report 2004: Towards Access for Opportunity Nov 2004 p23

[30] Cited from UN E-Government Readiness Report 2004: Towards Access for Opportunity Nov 2004 p52

[31] Cited from UN E-Government Readiness Report 2004: Towards Access for Opportunity Nov 2004 p60

[32] Cited from Accenture Leadership in Customer Service: New Expectations, New Experiences. Apr 2005 P29

[33] R. ROSE A Global Diffusion Model of e-Governance (Cambridge University Press) 2005 p. 15

[34] Cited from UN E-Government Readiness Report 2004: Towards Access for Opportunity Nov 2004 p70

[35] Cited from UN E-Government Readiness Report 2004: Towards Access for Opportunity Nov 2004 p71

[36] Cited from UN E-Government Readiness Report 2004: Towards Access for Opportunity Nov 2004 p71

[37] Cited from Accenture Leadership in Customer Service: New Expectations, New Experiences. Apr 2005 P11

[38] Cited from Accenture Leadership in Customer Service: New Expectations, New Experiences. Apr 2005 p.11

[39] Cited from Accenture Leadership in Customer Service: New Expectations, New Experiences. Apr 2005 P17

[40] Cited from Accenture Leadership in Customer Service: New Expectations, New Experiences. Apr 2005 P29

[41] T. Kinder Vote Early, Vote Often? Technology In European Cities (Public Administration) 2002

[42] L. Torres, V. Pina, and B. Acerete E-Governance Developments in European Union Cities: Reshaping Government’s Relationship with Citizens (Blackwell Publishing) 2006 p. 290

[43] L. Torres, V. Pina, and B. Acerete E-Governance Developments in European Union Cities: Reshaping Government’s Relationship with Citizens (Blackwell Publishing) 2006 p. 292

[44] L. Torres, V. Pina, and B. Acerete E-Governance Developments in European Union Cities: Reshaping Government’s Relationship with Citizens (Blackwell Publishing) 2006 p. 296

[45] L. Torres, V. Pina, and B. Acerete E-Governance Developments in European Union Cities: Reshaping Government’s Relationship with Citizens (Blackwell Publishing) 2006 p. 296