Neither open nor ambitious when it comes to Australia's open government plans

Having spent time and energy, commencing in 2011when the initiative was first announced, in encouraging, advocating and participating in Australian involvement in the Open Government Partnership, my optimism and enthusiasm for the cause has taken a nose dive in recent times. 

I'm glad a small cohort of determined supporters of democratic principles hang in there.

But with no champions at the highest levels of a government that some suggest is allergic to transparency our commitments to reform have been mediocre in ambition, modest at best in terms of results, limited in reaching out to raise awareness and extend participation beyond usual suspects (no offence intended), and opaque when it comes to what is going on behind the scenes.

On the last mentioned:

The Open Government Forum "Australia's multi-stakeholder forum" comprised of members from government and civil society hasn't met for five, almost six months- since November.

The minutes of the last meeting on 27 November 2020 are yet to be published. 

(Update Sometime after I asked PMC about the minutes on 7 April they appeared in the meeting papers on the PMC website available here)

A document in published papers for that meeting refers to a planned Forum meeting on 18 February 2021 for 'Formal Close out of NAP 3 Development Process."The meeting wasn't held then, or since apparently. Presumably the Forum is yet to formally 'close out.'

The process to develop a third national action plan commenced in November 2019 with a requirement at that stage that the completed plan would be submitted to the OGP in August 2020. The Pandemic saw the due date extended to 28 February 2021. PMC tell me the plan is yet to be submitted because the government has not formally considered and endorsed it. (And of course the Forum hasn't closed out yet on what the government will later consider. The draft commitments as they stood in November-Item 5 in this list-bear little resemblance to what most commentators and experts regard as priorities in addressing the current retreat from accountability and transparency)

Then Minister Cormann was the 'co-ordinating minister' for Australia's OGP commitments and the development, adoption  and implementation commencing with the first national action plan in 2016-2018 but if he spoke publicly about the OGP during the ensuing five years apart from a short attendance at a meeting in Paris some years back, I must have missed it. He resigned from the ministry on 30 October 2020. You'll struggle to find any mention of who took his place but PMC advise its Assistant Minister Ben Morton- who hasn't spoken a word about it either that I can find. A speech to the Australian Public Service by the Assistant Minister in February 2021  includes a section headed "The Government's ambition Inspiring Australians to engage in democracy" but not a word about open government, the OGP, anything the government might claim as reforms past or planned.

In early 2019, then Civil Society Co-Chair of the Forum Fiona Mcleod SC (Chair of Accountability Roundtable) and a candidate in the Federal election held at that time stood down. While the position has been capably filled on an interim basis by Adjunct Professor Ken Coghill, no replacement for Ms McLeod has been announced for over two years. 

The OGP requires independent assessment of the design and implementation of the commitments adopted by OGP participating governments in their country action plans. Three reports have been published on Australian plans, way too late to have much impact. None give Australia much in the way of commendation, no commitments qualify as ambitious. None are published on the PMC website. The government is also required to publish a midterm and closing report on each plan.  The most recent self assessment (pdf) published on the PMC website is at mid term of the 2016-2018 plan.

Along this ten year journey I've often concluded that when it comes to high standards and practices regarding accountability, transparency and integrity, I live in hope but on form to date the Morrison government makes hope look futile.

Press Council awards 2017 Press Freedom Medals

Media Release  APC 19 May 2017.

"The Australian Press Council has awarded its Press Freedom Medal to two outstanding individuals for their major contributions to ensuring a free and open society:
Peter Timmins - Australian Open Government Partnership Network
and Michael Cameron - News Corp Australia.

The 2017 Press Freedom Medals were awarded at a special ceremony in Sydney on 19 May. As well as members of the Press Council, journalists and guests from a variety of organisations attended.

Peter Timmins is a well-known advocate of improved standards of transparency and accountability and Australia's leading expert on Freedom of Information (FOI) policy and privacy, as well as being a leader of the Australian Open Government Partnership Network and publisher of the Open and Shut blog.

Michael Cameron is the National Editorial Counsel for News Corp Australia. He leads an in-house legal team, which he established, whose members have appeared in dozens of matters involving challenges to suppression orders, injunctions, defamation actions and so on, advocating for transparency and open justice.

"The purpose of the Australian Press Council is to promote responsible journalism to inform the Australian public and support effective democratic institutions. This year's winners have been exemplary in their tireless pursuit of the critical principle that citizens have a right to know, and so governments, and other important public and private institutions, must operate in an open and transparent manner," said Chair Professor David Weisbrot.

"Although the Press Council did not set off with this intention, this year's Press Freedom Medal winners prove the point that free speech and press freedom are not only reliant on brave and capable editors and journalists, but also on lawyers, activists and others who fight to preserve and extend these freedoms."

Michael Cameron said: "I'm honoured to accept this award on behalf of the editorial legal team at News Corp Australia, whose tireless work enables the publication of articles that would be otherwise be barred by our unduly secretive courts system and plaintiff-friendly defamation laws. Special thanks goes to Larina Mullins, our senior litigation counsel, who has appeared at close to 100 suppression hearings in the last three years."

Peter Timmins said: "This is a great but unexpected honour, a tribute to the many individuals and organisations including the Press Council that believe strongly in open, transparent and accountable government and joined the network to seek to ensure the government lives up to its Open Government Partnership commitments. Pursuing reform to improve our democracy is a never-ending journey."

The Press Council has awarded Press Freedom Medals in earlier years, but it was reserved for people affiliated with the organisation. It was decided last year to revitalise the award and open it up to people who, through their work as journalists, legal practitioners, community activists or advocates, help ensure the preservation of free speech, press freedom and open and transparent government.

In May 2016, Kate McClymont of Fairfax Media and Paul Maley of News Corp Australia received the first of the medals awarded under the new criteria, to great acclaim.
Read the award citations here."

 

Input invited on draft OGP National Action Plan

It's been quite a journey since Australia was first invited to join the Open Government Partnership in August 2011, since the Labor Government signed on in May 2013, and since Prime Minister Turnbull revived Australia's commitment in November 2015, but...

A draft Open Government National Action Plan has been released this morning by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet for public consultation.

The Minister for Finance has drawn attention to the plan and invited public comment. (Administrative responsibility remains with PM&C)

The draft Plan can be accessed/downloaded here:

• PDF: Australia’s first Open Government National Action Plan
• DOCX: Australia’s first Open Government National Action Plan
• HTML: Australia’s first Open Government National Action Plan

As the minister states, the draft was developed through a consultation process that began in December 2015 and was informed by an interim working group established in August 2016. 

The extent of 'ambition' is in each detailed commitment and views will vary on whether some go far enough but proposals now on the table are to do something about:

1.    Transparency and accountability in business
1.1.  Improve whistle-blower protections in the tax and corporate sectors
1.2.  Beneficial ownership
1.3.  Natural resource transparency

2.    Open data and digital transformation
2.1.  Release high-value datasets and enable data-driven innovation
2.2.  Build and maintain public trust to address concerns about data sharing
2.3.   Digitally transform the delivery of government services

3.    Access to government information
3.1.  Information management and access laws for the 21st century
3.2.  Understand the use of freedom of information
3.3.  Improve the discoverability and accessibility of government data and information
   
4.    Integrity in the public sector
4.1.  Confidence in the electoral system and political parties
4.2.  National Integrity Framework
4.3.  Open contracting

5.    Public participation and engagement
5.1.  Delivery of Australia’s Open Government National Action Plan
5.2.  Enhance public participation in government decision making.

Information sessions
Information sessions organised by Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet will be be held in the next week.

At each a government representative will discuss Australia’s process to join the OGP and lead a discussion on the commitments. A civil society representative who participated in the Interim Working Group will be present as will others from the Australian Open Government Partnership Network Steering Committee (of which I'm the interim Convener).

If you are interested in any of these issues please consider attending and encourage others to do so.

A high level of interest and participation at this stage will help demonstrate the importance we attach to the OGP initiative and to meaningful reforms.

RSVP by emailing ogp@pmc.gov.au.

Brisbane
Thursday 3 November 2016 5:30pm – 7:30pm
Griffith University, QCA Lecture Theatre and Gallery (S05), Room 2.04, South Bank QLD 4101
(in conjunction with a panel discussion on Extracting strategic advantage from public data sources)
This is a free event with this separate registration essential.

Melbourne
Thursday 3 November, 11am-12pm
St Michael’s Uniting Church, 120 Collins Street, Melbourne VIC 3000

Sydney
Friday 4 November, 11am – 12pm
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, Level 3, 175 Pitt Street, Sydney NSW 2000

Perth
Friday 4 November, TBC

Canberra
Monday 7 November, 11am – 12pm
National Archives of Australia, Menzies Room, Queen Victoria Terrace, Parkes ACT 2000

If you aren't a member of the Australian Open Government Partnership Network we would love to have you join us. Finalisation of this first plan is the beginning of a longer journey to promote transparency, empower citizens, fight corruption, and harness new technologies to strengthen governance. The network is in this for the long haul.

Sunshine and rain on Right to Know Day

Right to Know Day 28 September- great to see traffic on the twitter feeds including plenty from Australia at #RighttoKnow

While observance has been trending in the right direction in recent years, its another step in the right direction given Right to Know Day often passed virtually unnoticed here.

Something positive from the highest levels of government on the importance of the right to know would be a welcome development but alas..

So too, with three ministers in New York last week, an Australian presence at the Fifth Anniversary Celebration of the Open Government Partnership would have indicated strong interest and commitment as well.

Alas again....

Further rain amid the sunshine:
 The Center for Law and Democracy in Toronto and Access Info Europe used the occasion to publish an updated Global Right to Information Rating, analysing the quality of the world's access to information laws.

The Australian legislative framework (the Federal Freedom of Information Act) comes in 56 of 111 rated, down four places since the previous assessment.

Mexico tops the list, and of particular interest UK 33, NZ 40, Canada 48 and USA 55.

Among the eye raisers, Russia 34, China 80, Japan 90, France 94, Germany 105 and Austria 111.

You can quibble with some of the scoring in the Australian assessment where we receive 83 points of a possible 150-in a few areas the assessor in my opinion has been off the money -  but  overall the act, hailed in its time in 1982 as up there with the best, is no better these days on these criteria than middle of the pack.

That's before attention to matters beyond the scope of the rating including

• outdated features of the act that reflect the 70s rather than the twenty teens, for example one of many, Section 17,

• recommendations to address weaknesses and enhance the law and practice arising from reviews including the Hawke report , the Australian Law Reform Commission and the Australian Information Commissioner (and loads more suggestions from outside government),

• the Office of Australian Information Commissioner first under threat of closure, then the government's failure to fill positions established by Parliament or fully fund the FOI watchdog role and the office information policy functions,

• the 'tone at the top'  as a result of the absence of positive leadership and support for transparent accountable government at the same time as senior public servants speak out critical of the law generally ('very pernicious') and about its impact on their capacity to do their job, 

• the interpretation and practical application of the law in some agencies that give rise to the epithet 'freedom from' rather than 'freedom of' information. Sarah Gill of The Age on Fairfax Media yesterday in "Have we reached peak secrecy?" pulled together some examples, arguing

"Despite the Turnbull government's professed enthusiasm for transparency and accountability, (ie membership of the OGP) this year – marked by a shroud of secrecy over border protection, the targeting of whistleblowers, and the intransigence of the Attorney-General around the release of his diary – could well be the low point for open government in Australia since Freedom of Information laws were introduced three decades ago."

Andrew Dyson SMH

Peak Secrecy? Give hope a chance?
Despite the validity of the examples cited and others that could be added, there are plenty of contenders for the 'peak secrecy' award over the last thirty years that IMO, would beat out the 15 months of the Turnbull era on display so far. The implacable attachment to the conclusive ministerial certificate during the Howard years and the eleven years it managed to ignore any positive reform for example.

As I commented at the six month mark, the record of the Turnbull government suggests hope as well as disappointment.

Six months on, membership of the Open Government Partnership, the yet to be completed National Action Plan of commitments to reform, and the Prime Minister's endorsement of the goals of the OGP as consistent with "Australia's long and proud tradition of open and transparent government" gives hope some chance.

Will the siege on the Office of Australian Information Commissioner continue?

With the Federal Government on the receiving end for 'doing nothing' on a range of pressing issues and three sitting days before Parliament rises until the Budget in May, will Attorney General Brandis stick with doing nothing, pull the bill to abolish the Office of Australian Information Commissioner from the Senate or call it on for a vote that he knows the government can't win?

Doing nothing speaks for itself- a discouraging, dispiriting message for those still looking for signs of real interest in 'good government' and recognition that transparency, accountability and public participation are a big part of the mix.

Withdrawal of the bill would indicate serious intent regarding the Prime Minister's commitment to join and participate-'play a leading role' no less- in the Open Government Partnership. 

Arguing in the Senate in a futile attempt to convince Labor, the Greens and the crossbench senators to support abolishing the watchdog/advocate for open government at the same time we talk of stepping up to the plate on open government would again expose the feeble reasoning behind the move and the inconsistency between this policy position and the PM's enthusiasm for open government.

We live in hope....... 

 

If every state in Australia has one what's holding back the establishment of a Federal anti-corruption commission?

Quentin Dempster in The Saturday Paper 

The case for a federal ICAC is compelling. With highly skilled forensic accountants, metadata analysts and IT specialists; phone tap, covert surveillance and search warrant powers to gather evidence; and the power to compel attendance at preliminary in-camera interrogation, a federal commission against corruption could start to correct the myth that there is little or no corruption at the Commonwealth level......
Resistance to a federal corruption commission is expected to be intense from within the political parties and the Murdoch press because, as in NSW, its very existence would confront Australia’s corruptible and influence-peddling political and commercial cultures.
Examples of corruption will be fobbed off as “just a few bad apples”. As in NSW, such an investigative body will be likened to a “star chamber” or a Russian show trial. But the need and the benefits are manifest.....
The NSW ICAC, with a budget of $25 million, assesses an annual state public-sector budget of $70 billion. With the Commonwealth’s annual expenditure now running at $434 billion, the case for an adequately funded countermeasure for a culture vulnerable to corruption would seem to be self-evident. 

Important to you?

Join the like-minded such as Transparency International Australia, Accountability Roundtable and others as discussion gets underway about public integrity, anti-corruption measures  and related topics in the context of development of Australia's Open Government Partnership National Action Plan.

Lots of room for your thoughts, ideas, suggestions and observations.
 
Become a member of the Australian Open Government Partnership Network, or tell the Prime Minister's department directly what you think.  

What's holding us back from strengthening democracy?

The Human Rights Law Center Report Safeguarding Democracy released yesterday 

"documents how federal and state governments are adopting new laws and practices that undermine critical components of Australia’s democracy like press freedom, the rule of law, protest rights, NGO advocacy and courts and other institutions. It outlines 38 recommendations to stop the erosion and strengthen our democracy."

Is democracy important to you? Are you up for the cause of strengthening and improving democratic practices?
 
Join the like-minded as discussion gets underway about open, transparent government, public integrity, citizen engagement and related topics in the context of development of Australia's Open Government Partnership National Action Plan.

Lots of room for your thoughts, ideas, suggestions and observations. 

Join the Open Government Partnership Network, or tell the Prime Minister's department directly what you think. 

What's holding us back from doing something about money, politics and influence?

Important to you?

Join the like-minded as discussion gets underway about public integrity and related topics in the context of development of Australia's Open Government Partnership National Action Plan.

Lots of room for your thoughts, ideas, suggestions and observations. 

Join the Open Government Partnership Network, or tell the Prime Minister's department directly what you think. 

A selection below from media commentary in the last few days prompted by the Stuart Robert scandal - following years of deaf ears to calls for reform.

 Lenore Taylor (Guardian Australia) on Q&A

I think these scandals come and they go, the person resigns if there is enough political pressure but the only thing that will change the system is if we change donation laws and change the relationship between politicians and big money.

Katherine Murphy (Guardian Australia) and Mark Riley (Seven Network) on ABC Insiders (at 37 minutes), in summary:

the conduct of the minister in the Robert case where he seemed to assume he was a tourist while involved in activities to advance the interests of a business friend and political party donor in China, a business in which he held shares, was appalling. It revealed a political culture where people don't know where to draw the line, and pointed up the need for a hard look and a national conversation about corporate interests, money, politicians and power.

Stephen Mayne Crikey: Can Cormann (and Stuart Robert) fix our broken campaign finance system? (Subscription)

Paul Bongiorno in the New Daily

"..the Robert affair points up the shocking inadequacy of Australia’s political donation regime. There is not enough accountability or transparency....Greater donation limitations and transparency are needed urgently to preserve the national interest from greedy vested interests."

Mike Seccombe, The Saturday Paper "Stuart Robert and political donations."

"The evidence of any significant difference between the parties when it comes to ministerial standards is very weak. But there is a difference when it comes to the corrupting influence of political donations, and a very strong correlation between ideology and money. The conservative parties and their big money donors are the major enemies of limits, accountability and transparency...

The conservatives have also pioneered various means of circumventing disclosure, setting up associated entities to collect money, and by moving it between various party divisions to exploit differences in rules between states. That is not to say Labor is squeaky clean, either, but the record clearly shows that when it comes to dubious means of collecting funds, the Coalition tends to be the initiator and Labor the imitator. ....

[as (High Court) Justice Stephen Gageler (in McCloy) noted] that while buying preferential access to government did not necessarily result in corruption, “the line between a payment which increases access to an elected official and a payment which influences the official conduct of an elected official is not always easy to discern”. The implication of his words is obvious: the bigger the donation the bigger the risk of corruption. The elimination of preferential access to government that resulted from the making of political donations was not just “a legitimate legislative objective,” said Gageler. “More than that, the elimination of that form of influence on government is properly characterised as a compelling legislative objective.”

In other words, let’s set limits on donations, so moneyed interests can no longer buy politicians. Because this is not about Stuart Robert; it is about the whole system."

Editorial The Canberra Times "The public service not ministers, remains Australia's corruption risk."

"Ultimately, the Robert affair distracts attention from a deeper failing in government transparency. Federal parliamentarians' financial interests are generally well known; and, as a result, politicians mostly steer clear of obvious conflicts of interest. Yet, in practice, the vast majority of public spending is co-ordinated and approved by senior bureaucrats, not ministers. Unlike politicians, these officials have no need to make any public disclosures of their private interests. Yes, they are required by law to "take reasonable steps to avoid any conflict of interest (real or apparent)" – usually to their direct manager. However, the lack of regular or systematic investigation of these hidden disclosures begs the question: just how many scandals go undetected within the government?
While this secrecy remains, Australians will be unable to be entirely confident that their government – the executive and the bureaucracy – is as squeaky clean as it should be."

Challenge for new minister: If open data is changing the world, what's holding things back here?

Following the ministerial reshuffle on Saturday, Angus Taylor is Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister for Cities and Digital Transition. On digital government, he replaces Communications Minister Mitch Fifield appointed last September. 

Mr Taylor's Twitter account states

"Rhodes scholar. Business consulting and agriculture background @mckinsey and Port Jackson Partners. Passionate about good government"

So roll out the red carpet as discussion gets underway about access to information, public data, public integrity, use of technology, better services and public resources, in the context of developing Australia's Open Government Partnership National Action Plan.

Lots of room for your thoughts, ideas, suggestions and observations. Join the Open Government Partnership Network, or tell the Prime Minister's department directly what you think.

On access to government data, below two reports about opportunities for giant steps forward and another close to home about how the Federal government's "capacity to fully derive value from public sector data is constrained by competing priorities and the lack of an overarching strategy" and a plan what to do about it.


Worldwide 
The GovLab (@thegovlab), in collaboration with Omidyar Network (@OmidyarNetwork) has published detailed open data case studies that seek to provide understanding of the various processes and factors underlying the demand, supply, release, use and impact of open data. Conclusions:

• Open data is improving government, primarily by helping tackle corruption, increasing transparency, and enhancing public services and resource allocation.

• Open data is also empowering citizens to take control of their lives and demand change; this dimension of impact is primarily mediated by more informed decision making and new forms of social mobilization, both in turn facilitated by new ways of communicating and accessing information.

• Open data is also creating new opportunities for citizens and organizations, by fostering innovation and promoting economic growth and job creation.

• Open data is playing an increasingly important role in solving big public problems, primarily by allowing citizens and policymakers access to new forms of data-driven assessment of the problems at hand. It also enables data-driven engagement producing more targeted interventions and enhanced collaboration.

 Australia 
The Bureau of Communications Research report Open Government data and why it matters now on the impact of open government data tends to focus on economic impacts with not much attention to other positives that feature prominently in the GovLab report.

The Bureau reveals open government data has potential to generate up to $25 billion per year.or 1.5 per cent of Australia's GDP. Conclusion:
 
"Open government data invariably has a net economic benefit
While there is little consensus on the magnitude of the economic benefits of open government data sets, it is apparent that they provide substantial current and potential net benefits to the economy and society.
In Australia, the estimated economic value of open government data sets range from a lower boundary of $500 million to an upper boundary of $25 billion—per year. Globally, the potential value of open data (both public and private) could be up to $4 trillion per year. Significant benefits associated with open government data include improved government services, more efficient operations and business practices, better information exchange, and more engaged citizens, as shown by the sample projects and initiatives discussed in this report.

The maximum public benefit will accrue from free provision of raw government data, or at the most pricing data at the incremental cost of provision
Given that the government collects a significant amount of raw data in the course of its usual operations—for example the provision of broadband and public transport services —much of the fixed cost associated with data collection is already incurred. Net public benefits of open government data are likely to be maximised by pricing at zero or, at the most, the incremental cost of provision (short-run marginal cost), reflecting its public good characteristics of being non-rivalrous and non-excludable.

Value-adding in open government data is generally better left to the private sector   
The rationale for the Australian Government’s provision of open data is strongest for raw data. Raw government data is likely to exhibit the strongest public good characteristics, and hence the broadest benefits from its release. In general, net public benefits will be greater if significant value adding (beyond provision in machine-readable form) is left to the market, as the market sector will generally have more informed insights in identifying what value-add is of benefit to the users. The private sector, especially in developed industries such as ICT, generally have a more established capability and capacity in transforming raw data into products and services that could be introduced in the market. 

Certain government data sets that are likely to have more significant economic impacts
Some of the potential high-value data sets held by governments that have been identified to date are spatial data, health data, transport data, mining data, environmental data, demographic and social data, and real-time as well as past emergency (e.g. bushfire) data."

Australia
Then there's the report on Public Sector Data Management published by the Department of Prime Minister in December 2015. Conclusions:

"Data is under-utilised in the APS. 

Currently, the Commonwealth’s capacity to fully derive value from public sector data is constrained by competing priorities and the lack of an overarching strategy:

• There is no clear mandate for the Commonwealth to use and release public sector data.

• There are barriers (perceived and real) to sharing data within the Commonwealth and with jurisdictions to improve policy and service delivery.

• The APS lacks sufficient incentives, skills and organisational arrangements to capitalise on its data.

• The Commonwealth does not have a strong culture of publishing data to foster economic opportunities."

The recommendations in the report set out an 18 month timetable of actions to change the way government does business by setting up the right frameworks, systems and capability to use, share and value data.

........................

Hmm, won't go into how opening government data and turning the culture around
gels with closing down the government watchdog charged with promoting that culture change and the oversight of our legislated right to access government information-  legislation oversighted by the Office of Australian Information Commissioner that includes an agency obligation to publish certain information....

And how we address two policy directions pulling against each other in the OGP National Action Plan

A challenge I expect even for a Rhodes scholar with McKinsey and Port Jackson experience. 

So far as I'm aware the words "Open Government Partnership" are yet to pass this Attorney General's lips.

Tl Australia urges inclusion of anti-corruption measures in OGP National Action Plan

"Transparency International Australia is calling on the Australian government to address critical deficiencies in Australia’s anti-corruption laws, as the country falls further on the international Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) for the third year in a row.

 Today it was revealed that world-wide perceptions of the level of corruption in Australia’s government sector continue to worsen, with Australia’s CPI score falling to 79, down from 85 in 2012, 81 in 2013 and 80 in 2014.

Australia is now ranked 13^th out of the 168 countries included in the Index – down six positions since 2012, and joining countries like Libya, Brazil, Spain and Turkey as big decliners over that period.

The annual Index compiled by Transparency International uses 12 surveys of expert assessment and views of business people globally. The highest ranked country is Denmark with a score of 91.

TI Australia’s incoming chairman The Hon. Anthony Whealy QC described the continued slide as “the result of inaction from successive governments who have failed to address weaknesses in Australia’s laws and legal processes.

“The delay in responding to these issues has now made reform critical and a commitment to ramp up efforts to tackle foreign bribery, which has particularly impacted perceptions of Australia, is now urgent.”

As a priority action, Mr Whealy and new TI Australia CEO, Phil Newman, are calling on the Australian Government to commit to enacting long overdue reforms to Australia’s foreign bribery laws before the end of 2016, as a crucial indicator of the country’s seriousness in fighting corruption.

“With Australia’s worst foreign bribery offences having been committed by former or current government-owned entities – the Australian Wheat Board, Note Printing Australia and Securency Limited – there is no excuse not to have implemented all of the OECD’s reform recommendations in this area by the end of the year,” Mr Newman said.

“TI Australia welcomes the Turnbull Government’s move to develop a national Open Government action plan in 2016, and looks forward to working with it on the many issues that must be addressed if we are to improve our corruption perception score and regain leadership on anti-corruption.”

Other key actions identified by TI Australia for arresting the slide in Australia’s global position include:

• A stronger, broad-based federal anti-corruption agency
• Reformed, more consistent anti-corruption and political finance regimes across Australia’s State, Territory and Federal governments
• Strengthening Australia’s anti-money laundering regime and enforcement to ensure public regulators, and key industries like finance and real estate, are not compromised by the flow of dirty money from overseas.

“TI Australia stands ready to work alongside the government and other organisations to improve our anti-corruption measures and uphold Australia’s commitments in this area internationally,” Mr Whealy concluded.

The full Corruption Perceptions Index ranking and regional tables can be found at: www.transparency.org/cpi

..................................................................................

If you are interested in the Open Government action plan, see the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet materials.
 
And get involved with the Australian Open Government Partnership Network, an independent coalition of individuals and organisations like TI Australia, formed for the purpose of engaging with government in this process.

Australia's Open Government Partnership ambition-twaddle or true commitment?

2016 should tell!

Judith Sloan writing in The Australian includes Australia's commitment to the OGP in her list of contenders for Twaddle of the Year 2015, along with the innovation statement:

My favourite part of the innovation statement is the bit about government as exemplar, an example of twaddle-speak itself. But let me turn to the master: “Right across the board you will see there are measures to ensure that government is digitally transformed, so that it is nimble, so that you can deal with government as easily as you can with eBay or with one of the big financial institutions.”
And just to give substance to this government as exemplar gig, you will be pleased to know that “Prime Minister Turnbull has committed the Australian government to membership of the Open Government Partnership and public consultation was launched to develop the National Action Plan for open government. The Open Government Partnership is a voluntary, multi-stakeholder international initiative created to promote transparency, empower citizens, fight corruption, and harness new technologies to strengthen governance.”
And here’s a further heads-up: “the Prime Minister’s aim is for the first Australian National Action Plan to include ambitious actions that support the OGP grand challenges of improving public services and better managing public resources. If we want this to happen, Australia needs your suggestions and input!”

Sloan in the end gives the prize to Ban Ki Moon for comments about the Paris climate conference.

The Prime Minister can put Sloan herself up there as a contender with deeds that match the words: by July 2016 an OGP National Action Plan developed in the true spirit of partnership with civil society containing a set of ambitious, concrete commitments to reform on transparency, open government, citizen participation and technological innovation.

And before the consultation process gets into second gear, canning the bill to abolish the Office of Australian Information Commissioner. 

The bill is opposed by a majority in the Senate and sits in the Bills List not just gathering dust but strengthening the hand of Sloan and others of sceptical bent.

The Australian Open Government Partnership Network and its members are prepared to take the PM at his word at this stage.

The Network's Interim Steering Committee is
Dr David Solomon (Accountability Roundtable), Chair,
Greg Thompson (Transparency International Australia)

Kat Szuminska (OpenAustralia Foundation)

Dr Nicholas Gruen (Open Knowlege Australia)
Leanne O'Donnell (Blueprint for Free Speech)

Jon Lawrence (Electronic Frontiers Australia)

Dr Johan Lidberg, School of Journalism Monash University

Craig Thomler, Social Media Planner, Digital Specialist, Gov 2.0 Advocate.
 

Convener Peter Timmins.

Sign in here to learn more about the Network as things move ahead in the new year. 

Privacy Commissioner not Australian Information Commissioner in the money?

I'd like to think Paul Farrell in The Guardian and others on social media are right that additional funding for the Office of Australian Information Commissioner in the Mid Year budget update for "Enhanced Welfare Payment Integrity — non-employment income data matching" until 2019 may signal the end of the long drawn out unsuccessful government attempt to close the office. 

The funds are earmarked for the privacy functions of the office. 

The Budget in May included funding for privacy functions and (reduced) funding for FOI functions in 2015-16 but nothing in forward estimates for the three years to follow.  The government plan is to scatter some functions around including packing the Privacy Commissioner off to the Australian Human Rights Commission if/when the abolition bill passes the Senate. The FOI oversight and review functions would be scrapped.

However another budget document revealed $4.2 million was allocated in the Budget over four years for the Privacy Commissioner to provide oversight of privacy implications arising from the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Data Retention) Act 2015 and the Counter‑Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Foreign Fighters) Act 2014. 

The latest additional funding could pass as more of the same. That is money to accompany the Privacy Commissioner wherever he ends up.

Let's hope the funding decision indicates something else: That someone has joined the dots to see that standing firm (without majority support in the Senate to pass the bill) jars with the grander more recent government decision to embrace transparent, open government and to this end, proceed with membership of the Open Government Partnership. The decision requires endorsement of a declaration that includes a commitment 

to providing access to effective remedies when information or the corresponding records are improperly withheld, including through effective oversight of the recourse process.

Australian Open Government Partnership Network Update

The Australian Open Government Partnership Network has a Landing Page if you are interested in linking up with other civic minded democracy supporters and reformers. Help spread the word. A website and online Forum soon we hope.

The network is an independent coalition of individuals and organisations formed for the purpose of engaging with government in the development of Australia's OGP National Action Plan. The network will provide a forum for the exchange of information and ideas on areas for reform, seek to ensure the action plan is developed in the true spirit of partnership, and work to assist government in the determination of priorities for consideration.

A member of the Network Steering Committee and Co-founder of OpenAustralia Foundation Katherine (Kat) Szuminska has been invited to the annual civil society peer exchange meeting in The Hague, Netherlands in January for civil society leaders that are pivotal OGP actors at home.
  
The Government run information sessions commenced in Brisbane yesterday, and continue in Sydney this evening (look forward to seeing you there), Melbourne tomorrow and Canberra on Thursday. Meanwhile, hardly stopping for breath, the Government is rolling out the second stage of the consultation - through to the end of February. Don't rush, everyone in Canberra is about to down tools for a spell.

For your interest, maybe, my chat about the OGP with Jen Fleming on ABC Radio yesterday-at 1.49.00 in this recording (disappears in seven days).