Comment

12 There are three essential messages in the E-government Strategy. First, use of the Internet has the potential to help us transform government into a more open, responsive, effective, and efficient institution delivering better value to New Zealanders. Second, taking a people-centric and collaborative approach to service delivery and internal administrative processes, and developing the enabling infrastructures of government, is the only way this will be achieved. Third, the Internet is a new channel for delivery of government that will augment, not replace, traditional methods unless shifts in demand indicate otherwise.

13 Our e-government programme will deliver the following benefits:

• social gains, from providing better services and making government more people-centric, open, responsive and participative;
• economic gains, from reducing compliance and transactions costs for businesses and individuals, providing better targeted public services, and making government a more efficient component of the economy;
• fiscal gains, through more efficient and cost-effective public expenditure on service delivery, and supporting information and technology systems; and
• general capability and performance gains across government.

14 Since the last revision of the strategy, we have seen new reasons and opportunities to improve government. Through the Review of the Centre and associatedinitiatives, we have set goals for the public sector that are complemented by our e-government goals. This has made it important to align and clarify the relationship between the two programmes. The latest revision shows how e-government is an enabler of our wider goals for the public sector, especially our desire that government deliver more people-centric and integrated services, and that collaboration between its agencies increase.

15 Agencies are now consulting with the SSC as required, which is enabling it to test for alignment with the E-government Strategy, and also to ensure that e-government initiatives are being developed in the context of Managing for Outcomes and the Statement of Intent process. In this way, the SSC can ensure that e-government is being used to improve agency performance in delivering services and achieving outcomes.

Progress to date

Foundation building

16 The portal is the most visible achievement of the e-government programme so far. We know that people are using e-government, and are interested in seeing more of it [ See New Zealand results from the GO 2002 study, available at http://www.e.govt.nz/programme/go-survey-2002.html]. The portal provides access to a rising number of government services - approximately 2500 by March 2003-for the increasing numbers of New Zealanders going online. It is a tangible example of what we will achieve through e-government.

17 The portal is important not just because of the access to government it provides. It has also given us a new ability to see what government does, who it does it for, where and how this occurs, and where opportunities for improvement exist.

18 Creating the portal has demonstrated the benefits, costs, and realities of cross-agency collaboration. It could not have been built without the leadership, facilitation, coordination, and resources provided by the centre. Equally, it would not exist without the dedicated effort of nearly 90 central government agencies and 86 local authorities.

19 The portal provides two types of e-government infrastructure. First, it is the online 'single-window to government' delivery channel, providing ready access at the all-of-government level. Second, the database of agency-level NZGLS metadata records (Metalogue™), used to create the content of the portal, is an example of 'component infrastructure' (a new element of our strategy). It is already being reused as a core component of WorkSite - the new labour market portal that several agencies have created. This has enabled immediate capital savings of $400,000, with ongoing operating savings in the region of $18,000 per annum. The portal search engine, and other parts of the portal infrastructure are currently being leveraged in the same way, and more is planned.

20 As well as the portal, other progress includes:

• implementation of the New Zealand Government Locator Standard (NZGLS) - [CAB Min (01) 38/2B refers], which has already achieved its early goals, and is internationally recognised as innovative practice;
• development of the authentication policy framework as a foundation for trustworthy e-government [CAB Min (02) 12/2A refers]; and progress on developing options for implementing electronic authentication in government;
• implementation of the e-Government Interoperability Framework (e-GIF) [CAB Min (02) 18/2C refers], a critical first step toward cost-effective service integration that is now a key element of the e-government programme; and
• continued development and agency uptake of the Secure Electronic Environment (S.E.E.) initiative.

Agencies' achievements

21 The first thing to note about agencies' achievements is that it is reasonable to expect to see the beginnings of widespread delivery against our e-government goals. The level of active commitment many agencies are showing to the programme is encouraging. The foundation building discussed above would not have been possible without a high level of effort from agencies.

22 Second, readers of the strategy will see a growing list of agencies' e-government achievements that is too long to include in this paper. The following three achievements illustrate how agencies are contributing to our e-government goals:

• Convenience and satisfaction - provision of NCEA results via the Internet;
• Integration and efficiency - development of WorkSite, the new labour market portal; and
• Participation- MoRST's recent use of the Internet to enable public consultation over the New Zealand Biotechnology Strategy.

An emerging culture of collaboration

23 A culture of collaboration among agencies, both among themselves and with the centre, is emerging around e-government. The portal is the obvious example of the benefits of collaboration, but we are also seeing its beginnings in initiatives such as the labour market portal that involves five agencies, and the e-Health initiatives that are being developed between the Ministry of Health and District Health Boards. Local government is collaborating in developing e-government, especially through its contribution to the portal. It is important that Ministers and the centre support the collaboration shown by these early steps, especially as many aspects of our public management system still inhibit this type of behaviour.

Revised strategy

Drivers of the revision

The revision accounts for the following:

• The Review of the Centre and Managing for Outcomes: The E-government Strategy supports the outcome oriented, people-centric, and collaborative style of government that we are aiming for. This revision ensures alignment between e-government and these goals.
• E-government goals for achievement by 2004: we still expect that the Internet will be the dominant means of enabling ready access to government by June 2004. The revision builds on progress toward this goal.
• Learning since the last revision: the previous revision identified some major challenges ahead of the programme. Experience shows that there are even more challenges ahead.
• Agencies deliver e-government, not the centre: the long-run success of the e-government programme depends on agencies, acting with the support of the centre. During 2002, good progress has been made in putting e-government foundations in place. This has been a prerequisite for serious effort by agencies, which can now confidently begin to use these foundations.
• Agencies have had sufficient time to prepare themselves: we articulated our vision for e-government in May 2000. Agencies have had nearly three years to understand and incorporate e-government into their strategies and business plans. Ministers should now expect to see agencies actively planning and implementing e-government initiatives.
• E-government means long-run change: the revision shows that the change sought through e-government and the Review of the Centre requires long-term effort, and that agencies will pass through a number of developmental stages. Achieving ready access to government via the Internet is only the first step in transforming government. The strategy now includes two new elements in the e-government mission that will frame the e-government goals we will need to set beyond June 2004.
• Autonomy may be traded off in the collective interests of efficiency and effectiveness: we have learned this through the experience of developing and implementing some e-government initiatives, notably the e-GIF and the NZGLS. Some goals and benefits cannot be realised without all agencies acting in concert, and sometimes these benefits outweigh those that may arise from agency autonomy.

25 Agencies need overarching direction, facilitation, and support from the centre: inter-agency collaboration and coordination is difficult and time-consuming. It is not costless, but is worthwhile. To be effective it often needs to be facilitated, and informed by a big picture view. Maximising the value of e-government requires the centre to provide ongoing facilitation, coordination, and support for agencies. It must create the all-of-government context vital to the e-government efforts of agencies. The revision provides for this in a variety of ways, focussed around a "service delivery architecture" to guide the electronic enablement and integration of services.

26 Providing all-of-government infrastructure does not fit with the role of agencies: strategy, leadership, shared conceptual models, and facilitation is not the only support that agencies need from the centre. They also need access to shared 'infrastructure', much of which is being built and operated by the E-government Unit (EGU) of the State Services Commission. Examples include common policy and standards frameworks such as the e-GIF, and shared information and technology resources such as the new e-government portal.

27 This points to the future role of the centre in the implementation and governance of the e-government programme. The early assumption that agencies would develop and provide shared infrastructure was largely mistaken. While many agencies are making a major contribution to the programme, 'lead agencies' for the provision of common, sector-wide, e-government infrastructures have not generally emerged, except where there is a clear fit with an agency's core business (e.g. LINZ's leadership of the development of geospatial data standards).

28 This is because such a role does not often fit with the functions of line agencies. They are also not funded for it. It is better aligned with the position and role of central agencies in assuring the capability and performance of the State sector as a whole. The revised strategy now assumes an ongoing, but not exclusive, role for the centre in developing and operating common infrastructure. It also assumes the active involvement of agencies in the conduct and governance of much of this work.

Key features of the revision

29 The strategy retains the overall direction, goals, and structure of the previous version, based on:

• a view that e-government is not a vast IT project, but rather is an enabler of better organised and more participative government that delivers better results and value for money;
• a commitment to building the programme on solid foundations; and
• a 'single enterprise' view of government, underlying a generic 'architecture' for how agencies can collaboratively use information and technology to support service design and delivery.

30 The first major change introduced in the revision is an expanded e-government mission. Previously, the mission of the strategy stopped at using the Internet to ensure ready access to government by 2004. This takes us only part way to our goals. If we are genuinely committed to e-government playing a role in transforming government, we need to think and act in a longer timeframe - at least until 2010. The mission of the strategy is therefore now expanded to:

1. By June 2004, the Internet will be the dominant means of enabling ready access to government.

2. By June 2007, networks and Internet technologies will be integral to the delivery of government information, services and processes.

3. By June 2010, the operation of government will have been transformed through its use of the Internet.

31 The second major change is the introduction of a 'service delivery architecture'. This provides a common basis for understanding how government services can be improved through integrated service delivery and shared use of information and technology.

32 The first step we took in addressing this was to implement the e-GIF. The new service delivery architecture embodies the e-GIF and relates it to the operations of agencies. It treats government as a single enterprise with a diverse set of operating units. It assumes that, rather than being unique, many aspects of what agencies do are generic (e.g. 'accept an electronic payment', 'authenticate an individual', 'change address', 'deliver a secure e-mail', 'consult on a policy'). These functions may best be electronically enabled in a standardised manner by all agencies, based on the logic of "build once, use many times".

33 This does not mean that agencies will all share exactly the same information and technology. For a start, the architecture does not seek to override or ignore any of the provisions of the Privacy Act 1993. Instead, implementation of the architecture will consist of:

• shared generic components: components developed and implemented only once, and used by many or all agencies (e.g. the portal);
• distributed generic components: standardised components that support a generic activity, but are implemented locally (e.g. a technology solution for handling online registrations that can be incorporated into different business processes in different agencies); and
• unique components: components that are specific to a particular agency, function, or service (e.g. Inland Revenue Department transaction processing systems).

34 The architecture pulls the roles of the centre and of agencies into balance. Importantly, it relies heavily on local, not centralised, implementation on an 'as required' basis. This allows weaknesses of decentralised management (e.g. unnecessary duplication of investment and effort going into creating incompatible information, business processes, and technology) to be avoided, without taking the risks associated with over-centralisation (e.g. creating single points of failure, constraining flexibility and innovation, and inappropriate levels of standardisation).

35 The architecture also supports improving the quality and consistency of government service delivery, as experienced by the public. It will enable agencies to deliver their services in ways proven successful in New Zealand (e.g. taking a best practice approach to online delivery of licences, or delivery of secure electronic correspondence).

36 The next major change in the strategy is the identification of several new challenges. Among them I would highlight:

• Trust: if New Zealanders do not trust e-government they will not use it. Building trust requires us to pay close attention to privacy, security, authentication, and the quality of what we offer to the public. Meeting this challenge will be one of the most important parts of our programme up to, and beyond, June 2004. The strategy addresses this through a variety of initiatives.
• Governance: e-government and our RoC initiatives depend on collaboration, horizontal integration, and the involvement of most government agencies. The public sector governance environment plays a significant role in this. Three major governance questions arise around e-government:
  • Cross-boundary decision-making. How can we balance the vertical style of current arrangements with mechanisms that enable more horizontal decision-making, and management of accountabilities that cross agency boundaries?
  • Wider State sector participation in e-government. Much service delivery happens outside of the core Public Service. The levers currently available to us mean that State sector agencies have so far only been invited to participate in the programme.
  • Optimizing the allocation of decision rights. While an ongoing role for the centre in infrastructure development and operation is assumed, there is still a need to question the current roles of the centre and agencies in making decisions about the future information and technology environment across the sector. If we are moving towards a more "single enterprise" view of government, we have to ask where certain roles, decision-making rights, and accountabilities are best allocated - with agencies, at the centre, or at some intermediate point.
• Data quality and information management: integration of services means alignment and possible integration of data (consistent with Privacy Act requirements), and consistency of information management practices. Inevitably, agencies will face problems with the variable quality and consistency of data, and its storage on different software and hardware platforms. The solution is to progressively invest in improving data quality and information management in ways that enhance, not restrict, future flexibility.

37 The final change to the strategy is the way it is published. The e-government programme has become much more complex over the past three years. It now comprises many projects in many agencies, and has diverse linkages with other issues and initiatives. It is also constantly evolving and changing. Accordingly, the strategy is now primarily intended for online access, and is best viewed via the Internet. Given the declining for a paper version, and the fact that the chief audience of the strategy is still public servants with Internet access, the EGU will now only produce low-cost printed copies on demand.