Your Right to Know resumes after a spell

Great to see media organisations today putting Your Right to Know up in lights with the front page wrap in publications across the country

together with articles and editorials that explain (or attempt to) why excessive secrecy is everybody's business.

'Mad as hell...' has been the theme for four months following police raids on the ABC and the home of journalist Annika Smethurst. A tepid response from the government has prompted action to roll out their biggest gun-front page news with a website and strong social media presence.


The six point agenda for reform has undergone slight changes since rolled out but amounts to:

• safeguards and checks around warrants allowing interception of journalistic communications and metadata; 

• real teeth for whistleblower protection to make the Public Interest Disclosure Act worthy of its name, and making sure the proposed Commonwealth Integrity Commission aligns with public interest reporting and confidentiality of sources; 

• an end to cavalier classification of many documents as secret when they should be open to public scrutiny; 

• a revamp of freedom of information laws so government cannot so easily stonewall perfectly reasonable requests for access; 

• exemption for journalists from a thicket of counter-terror laws that would put them in prison for doing their job; and

•  a vigorous effort to ensure the review of the uniform defamation law resets the legal balance so that painstaking investigative journalism can go about its work of exposing corruption, crime and abuse of power"

The 'this is everybody's business' line is welcome but slow in coming. 

Many organisations and individuals have been slogging away on advocacy on these issues consistently for years.While journalists have had plenty to write about, media moguls put little shoulder to the wheel. 

For the record:

Twelve years ago media organisations were prompted by developments to shout from the rooftops they were not going to take infringements on the public's right to know silently anymore.

Australia's Right to Know was launched in May 2007 with News Limited Chairman and CEO John Hartigan in the lead, supported by Fairfax Media, FreeTV Australia, commercial radio, ABC, SBS, Sky News, ASTRA, West Australian Newspapers, the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA), AAP and APN News and Media.

News Limited chairman and chief executive John Hartigan said Australia had become a "lightweight democracy" with a tangle of clumsy laws impinging on the public's right to know..... Mr Hartigan said it was time for the media to strike back."It's a matter of drawing a line in the sand and saying 'this is enough'," he said.

The coalition commissioned the Independent Audit into the State of Free Speech in Australia which delivered a 316 page report in October that year- I was the Deputy Chair.

The coalition made some headway on a couple of the issues raised in the report during the Rudd/Gillard years, and stuck around for a year or so.

Then disappeared as David Salter and Richard Ackland both commented in 2010, Ackland as follows:

I wondered why Australia's Right to Know Campaign had gone a bit quiet. This is the outfit driven by the main newspaper groups (including Fairfax) and broadcasters to lobby for fewer legal impediments that get in the way of reporters' access to information. A quick check of the Right to Know's website shows the last big thing to happen was a big free speech jamboree in Sydney a year ago. There have been no papers, reports or analysis since 2008. Maybe it's because The Australian newspaper has decided to change sides and go into the suppression business.

I wrote this at the time:

In early 2008 months after my involvement with ARTK as Deputy Chair of the Independent Audit of Free Speech finished I went to see John Hartigan, then head of News Ltd and ARTK, to make a pitch for the establishment of a permanent, professional and appropriately funded body to research, advocate, educate and lobby on freedom of speech, and the public’s right to be informed. I suggested that the media needed to seek out others who shared these interests, and that it cede some power to them so that the coalition could seek to deliver what its name conveyed-Australia's Right to Know. Voices on these issues were weak, sporadic, divided and underfunded and the coalition was well placed to change this. Hartigan listened politely, nodded at the appropriate time but that was it-and my last contact with ARTK.

A vigorous campaign would have involved enlisting allies to the cause, seeking to better inform the public about the importance of this issue, and  mounting a collective professional effort to go for gold on the reform front. The few voices that spoke up were all over the place, leading the Senate Committee to observe recently that there were many suggestions for changes to the reform bills, but no agreement on what should be changed, therefore there was no point in or time to consider them seriously, including most of those put forward by ARTK.  And of course many didn't speak up at all. ARTK three years after it formed has no web presence, no publicly available collection of submissions, no scorecard of performance, no coalition partners.

ARTK seemed to never hear about the government initiative in joining the Open Government Partnership let alone hop in to support the reform agenda that the likes of Transparency International Australia, Accountability Roundtable and others have pushed since 2013.

The case for that vigorous ongoing campaign and a collective professional effort is more important than ever.

Queensland integrity framework

The Open Government Policy Forum convened by Queensland Premier Campbell Newman will be held in Brisbane tomorrow, Tuesday, 13 August . 

The forum is part of a process of review of legislation, policies and institutions that make up Queensland’s integrity framework. 

I am on a panel on Creating an Open and Accessible Government, chaired by Professor Peter Coaldrake, with Jonathon Horton, Barrister, Elizabeth Jameson of Board Matters and Professor Bill Lane of Clayton Utz and QUT. 

Look forward to catching up with any of you who will be there.

The forum will be streamed online through the Parliament of Queensland broadcast facilities, and will be accessible at www.qld.gov.au/opengovernment.   

Four information papers provide background information:

• History of Queensland’s integrity institutions (PDF, 445KB)
• Overview of Queensland’s integrity framework (PDF, 218KB)
• Simplifying complaints management (PDF, 211KB)
• Creating an open government (PDF, 211KB).

There are also papers released earlier in connection with the review of the Right to Information and information Privacy acts.


 

Open Gov convoluted at ABS

The 2011 Census for free on the web sounded great until, as reported by ITNews, a programmer tried to access it and found it so incredibly difficult that the DVD for $250 was looking more attractive. Leading to speculation maybe this is what the ABS intended all along. Bear with us, says the Bureau. We're on the continuous improvement journey.

According to the spokesperson, the ABS has worked hard to reduce the costs since 2006, when similar datapacks cost $805. As for the convoluted download site layout with registration and obfuscated file paths, the spokesperson said there was room for improvement. "The ABS is constantly looking at ways it can simplify the website and enhance the user experience," iTnews was told via email.

Open government in transition: keep watch, still to come

 The report "Open Public sector information: from principles to practice" released on Friday by Australian Information Commissioner Professor John McMillan contains the results of a survey conducted in April and May 2012 of information management practices in Australian Government agencies, in particular how the Open Public Sector Information Principles were being implemented.

Professor McMillan's key take away is "that Australian Government agencies are actively embracing an open access and proactive disclosure culture" although there are "many policy challenges and practical obstacles that must be tackled. It is more a time of transition than fulfilment."

I haven't been through the report in detail but what stands out on the openness front are problems of awareness, attitude, leadership, resources and the limited powers in legislation or with the OAIC to require agencies to publish information that should be in the public domain.

The report includes a section on the advantages of keeping abreast of international developments for example through the Open Government Partnership, and after extolling the importance of top level leadership here at home, a polite public service plea for more help:

"..there has not since been the same explicit promotion of open government reform and cultural change by Government as occurred in 2009–10. We believe that explicit support would be valuable and timely in continuing the watershed reforms."

The PM's "let the sunshine in" moment of September 2010 could do with a rerun. Often.

The Sydney Morning Herald sub -editor, with some justification, saw the absence of political leadership as the story: "Openness policy stymied from the top"

Australia: UN Security Council today, OGP next month?

Those in Canberra looking for an "announceable" for the Prime Minister in Bali from 8-­‐9 November where she is to co-chair  the Fifth Bali Democracy Forum hosted by Indonesian President Yudhoyono, should push for a decision by then that Australia apply for membership of the Open Government Partnership.

We've been considering this for well over a year, with no result so far, as Australian Information Commissioner Professor McMillan explained when quizzed by The Greens Senator Rhiannon in Senate Estimates this week.

Professor McMillan said there are a number of issues that still need to be examined, and his office has been asked to explain in greater detail the role that it could play in preparing for example, a national action plan. But other pressures and limited resources meant that work is yet to be undertaken. A membership, decision would need to be made at the highest levels of government, presumably by the Prime Minister or cabinet. In the meantime his thoughts:

But I think it is of benefit to Australia to take heed of the substantial developments that are occurring internationally in relation to open government. Australia has achieved a great deal but there are many examples internationally from which Australia can learn about further implementation of open government. Participation in international forums is certainly an advantage to all countries, I would think, in this space.

Here are 10 reasons off the top of my head for a favourable decision quickly. By my reckoning PM&C, DFAT, AusAID, OAIC, AGIMO, AG's and RET all have an interest in the matters raised below. Can an interdepartmental committee like that move at a cracking pace? The track record isn't encouraging but we live in hope.

1. Professor McMillan is right, we would benefit directly from joining with others who think this stuff is important.  The Open Government Partnership describes itself as "a global effort to make governments better. We all want more transparent, effective and accountable governments -- with institutions that empower citizens and are responsive to their aspirations." So do we, including here at home. It's not just a fledging democracy gig. The US, UK, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, the increasingly influential Brazil, and Mexico along with South Africa, to name just some members, all see take home value in this. So should we. 

2.  The UK and Indonesia currently co-chair the OGP with 57 member countries. Both are good friends of Australia. Indonesia is more, located on our doorstep. Our foreign ministers agree there is "a unique partnership between Australia and Indonesia that would be an asset in supporting the region's ambitions" and that "Australia and Indonesia would co-operate on building a peaceful, prosperous and connected region." Here's another opportunity for partnering. Indonesia's representative at officials' OGP discussions is a senior officer from Strategic Initiatives at the President's Delivery Unit, close to the centre of things.

3. Only three countries, Indonesia, the Philippines (yet to pass a law) and Korea have joined in our region, a notably poor show given the lip service paid to open government in most countries in Asia and the Pacific. As a newly elected member of the UN Security Council (this morning) we should show some practical regional leadership, by example, not just words.

4.  By signing up to the OGP and now playing a leadership role, Indonesia is inviting close scrutiny of its track record and delivery on open government commitments at home and abroad. At home where the membership criteria requires civil society engagement with and evaluation of progress on a national national action plan, and abroad where independent evaluators also review the plan.This can only be a good thing. As the Indonesian National Action Plan states: "Open government is critical for Indonesia to complete its democratization process and to set a solid foundation towards a new strong economy characterized by a mature and open society."

(While no world beater on performance to this point (see for example this UCL Constitution Unit assessment and reports published on freedominfo.org), the RTI Index that ranks the access to information laws of 93 countries placed Indonesia 24 (99/150) on the list-Australia was 48 with 84/150, but that's another matter. Some good bones are in place there but performance to deliver takes time, as we know from experience. Encouragement from those nearby is both welcome and necessary. Update: democracy in Indonesia is under pressure as outlined in this commentary published on the Lowy Interpreter, reinforcing the point that friends should stand visibly alongside on the question of open government.)


5. Minutes of meetings of committees of the OGP held in recent weeks in New York show that willing helping hands are needed for this ambitious project to achieve its objectives. We're well placed to pitch in and contribute.

 6. Signing on to an international open government initiative such as this fits with our other interests. We seek to promote better governance through our official aid program, an element of which is more accountable, open and responsive government. Australia has over $700 million invested in initiatives to deliver on this in the region. After all we're in this region for the long haul, as the commissioning of the White Paper on Australia in the Asian Century testifies.

7. Indonesia is attempting to encourage and assist countries in the region. We should be giving a hand-see 6 above. As the National Action Plan states "as the current chair and the biggest economy of ASEAN countries, Indonesia holds the moral responsibility to be the role model for the region in the area of good governance and accountability." Tara Hidayat of the Indonesian President's Delivery Unit in Jakarta told the Steering Committee in New York that Indonesia and the Philippines have been exchanging ideas. Indonesia is to replicate the Philippines "check My School" program. Our experience with My School might come in handy. There are plenty of other examples.

8. Another open government topic of regional significance raised by Ms Hidayat in New York, the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, is an issue of great interest to us. The EITI aims for better transparency through companies publishing their payments and governments disclosing their receipts from those companies. It promotes better governance in countries rich in oil, gas and minerals and seeks to reduce the risk of diversion or misappropriation of funds generated by the development of a country’s extractive industry resources. It works through the joint co-operation of governments, private sector companies and civil society groups. Australia is a member of the EITI Management Committee and has committed $17.45 million (2007 to 2015) to the World Bank administered Multi-Donor Trust Fund and the EITI Secretariat. The only EITI compliant country in the region is Timor-Leste. Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands are interested or on the way. We have a stake in this.

9. As evidenced by the fact that the EITI has accepted the Australian Government invitation to hold its global conference in Sydney in May 2013.  Foreign Minister Carr says Australia is keen to encourage more countries to adopt the initiative.  If we're behind efforts to make this the global standard, getting involved with something similar on open government generally makes good sense.

10. The Fifth Bali Democracy Forum hosted by Indonesian President Bangbang Yudhoyono  will be held on November 8-­‐9, 2012. Prime Minister Gillard will be attending having accepted a personal invitation from President Yudhoyono to co-chair the Forum. To quote the Media Release:

 Australia has welcomed and supported Indonesia’s evolution into a strong and vibrant democracy, and greatly values the constructive leadership role that our close neighbour plays in the region and beyond. The Forum, which Australia has supported since its inception in 2008, is a key inter-governmental meeting for advancing democratic reform.

The OGP is about continuous improvement in the practice of democracy. The Bali Forum is the perfect opportunity for the PM in her opening address to announce we have decided to join the OGP. Ms Hidayat told the Steering Committee in New York that an OGP session will be included in the Forum agenda. As a country committed to joining we might even be able to grab a seat, rather than have to sit that session out.

Surely even in these tough times a country proud of how well its economy is traveling could find $50,000 (the membership fee, and sure that's just for starters) for this good cause?

Can we do it? Yes we can! Oh, and I'm ready to serve (inexpensively) should my country need me. 

The Hansard extract of the questioning of Professor McMillan on this topic in Estimates follows: