Yes, there's been a lot of back and forth on that over the last week and there's some good arguments and designs in @richardpope.org's #Platformland too.
There's a bit to around people being anxious about automatic data sharing between departments, so some caution needed, but navigable.
The "big P politics" point is really welcome. I think sometimes we frame these choices as technocratic or implementation details when they are changes that politicians would need to understand, own, advocate and defend.
Yes, on the "service -> digital transformation" point I do agree with you that the digital side could lead, fundamentally because those in the House don't understand what's possible.
I do think we need alphagov 2.0 (alphaGaaP). *We* need to demonstrate what's possible (with Maude 2.0)
But then perhaps that's not possible, as it requires a sympathetic reorganising of much of the way government is allowed to work, and that requires much more than Maude 2.0
There again, alphagov succeeded perhaps because it was an open invitation to think wishfully, even hopefully. There is a good deal of power in that approach, so perhaps it is best not to be shackled by perceived practicality. If a vision can be sold, and the right people come along for the ride...
I think maybe the point here is that if you (crudely) see the 2010 configuration as an enormous hack on the system, then when you're building steady infrastructure then you need to be able to answer these sorts of points: https://bsky.app/profile/fantasticlife.bsky.social/post/3l5u2njuwqv2j
I think this is the point @pubstr.at was making in a 2010 blog post.
Personally I think you have to think wishfully, begin with a vision and turn the tanker in that direction. I also think alphagov may be that approach's practical limit. alphaGaaP is so much harder to sell/implement
… post office to fill and send a form via postal order. Comms on phone and form were unclear and it would have been so easy to incorporate this into a user centred online service via a full UCD team.
Interesting. I think looking at the tech alone won’t work. The teams on gov services need to be given greater control to work with policy teams and seniors to help shape tech use that is user friendly. Eg I waited on hold for 15 mins for the DVLA and then had to go to the post office to 1/
Great to see ‘whole service transformation’ highlighted Jeni - a key learning over the past few years. It can’t just be about digital or tech moving forward
Enjoyed the discussion about this, including @janethughes.bsky.social reflections. Do you know of the work Noisy Cricket has been doing in Manchester, on furthering the value and methods of community engagement? Some good thinking on how we might make it more mainstream: https://medium.com/noisy-cricket/whats-the-value-of-community-engagement-7cb375d25152
Yep, saw that, which is partly why I thought of Lauren and the work of NC, as they’ve just worked on the citizen-led security standard with the good people at Open Data Manchester. Always subject to funding though. Feels like we could join up some of this community interest work with Gov procurement
This looks really interesting but I don't see any mention of the most important concern for many: privacy. As public services increasingly migrate to digital, the potential for authoritarian control increases. We need reassurance.
Thanks for the comment, and yes I agree. I tend to think of protecting our privacy along with other individual and collective rights. Hence the importance of ensuring we're supporting the people who hold government to account. But you're right to highlight this as it is a risk.
Comments
NB this was piloted so long ago I’ve forgotten the date. Certainly over 20 years ago.
There's a bit to around people being anxious about automatic data sharing between departments, so some caution needed, but navigable.
DWP were happy that sufficient data was collected for fair decisions to be made.
My impression was that many questions on existing forms were designed to make claiming difficult.
I do think we need alphagov 2.0 (alphaGaaP). *We* need to demonstrate what's possible (with Maude 2.0)
Buckminster Fuller agrees
Personally I think you have to think wishfully, begin with a vision and turn the tanker in that direction. I also think alphagov may be that approach's practical limit. alphaGaaP is so much harder to sell/implement