I think a better way to approach this project – as Matthew and James have already stated would be to ask departments what information the public requests the most – rather then what departments might think is valuable to make publicly available.
I have to agree with those that have already mentioned talking to the people that are trying to do this stuff – the business areas that have been stifled at every step trying to get something innovative done in this space. I am sure we could all identify at least one project in our respective agencies that this has happened to.
I concur with yvonne – get out there – fail early and fail often – and people will respect you more, then hiding behind a faux wall of omnipotence. The role of the opposition will change, becoming more useful – as it will be able to have greater say in policy development through collaborative efforts and input rather then us vs them – which question time seems to typify in all the worst ways
I think making govt information more accessible is an essential first step in moving toward gov2.0 – it will allow third parties to publish in easy to access ways the end products of govt policies – making it much easier to organise people to support/ advocate about issues – the data needs to be access via standard web/tech protocols and not locked up in reports – which provide a barrier to access in terms of republishing data.
think there needs to be a recognition that some information would need to be digitised as well
I would say in answer to this question that when information provided for policy formulation by a department contradicts the govt’s policy decision that there is pressure on the APS to keep such information private.
Hasn’t cost recovery as a concern been soundly debunked because of the economic benefits to the community at large? how is it possible to quibble of a few 10 of thousands of dollars to make data available when the potential benefits to the overall economy have been shown by the UK and US to be in the 10 of millions and more?
wondering if we there needs to be some acknowledgement of the three levels of govt here – as this is going to be a major hurdle in adoption of collection practices outlined
also – does there need to be a distinction between the APS and how it engages and the elected representatives?
another point – is there govt information that shouldn’t be made available… does this need stating?
within government sounds ambiguous to me… do you mean by govt- or sharing between govts?
I think this paragraph has the balance about right… but perhaps there should some emphasis on the role of web2 serving to enhance existing consultation processes rather then inventing new ones. The transparency and openness stuff will take longer and is more threatening -gathering feedback is already done.