Labour is about to try something new. A new way of developing policy. Out in the open, and involving you.
Labour wants to start by developing a policy on open and transparent government. We want to do that in an open and transparent way.
Over the next couple of weeks there will be a series of posts on Red Alert on this.
- The first post will outline the process and how you can participate.
- The second will present some initial principles and ideas to generate discussion.
This is exciting and new and because it’s our first time, we might make some mistakes. We hope you’ll show goodwill and tolerance and above all, that you’ll have things to say.
Open and transparent government is about how politicians, the governing party and the public sector constructively interacts with citizens to be more democratic and effective.
Will you be writing Labour policy?
We want to be upfront with you from the beginning
Your input will contribute to Labour’s policy. The #openlabournz document will be taken as a key input for Labour to consider in developing its policy, noting the other drivers and that there will be changes possibly made between it and the final policy. However, please be assured that the final output will be of high quality, and that high quality suggestions are always taken very seriously in Labour Party policy development.
Labour is of course a political party and politics will dictate what the final policy looks like and how it is arrived at. Once the #openlabournz document is completed, we will keep you posted about where the policy is at, and where it ends up. Labour’s policy finalisation process is for Labour members and you’re welcome to participate in that next step through the usual route of joining the party.
Why are we doing this?
Red Alert was established as a tool using new technology to build a voice for Labour and to demonstrate that we are doing things differently and prepared to truly “engage” with the public in ways we haven’t before.
The debates on Red Alert are good. There is a definite need however for another mechanism which takes the discussion further on particular issues. A way of providing an open forum for discussion that can provide input into Labour policy. That’s authentic. That shows we are who we say we are.
#OpenLabourNZ is a way to do that. If the process works, we’ll do it again on other issues. You might have suggestions. So remember the hash tag #OpenLabourNZ. And watch this space for the next post.
An extremely ambitious step to take Clare. I hope to contribute, should there be a policy that I feel I could offer insight on.
Be careful not to make it so that others can pinch your ideas.
Well done Labour.
I will submit and even write two simple amendment bills for it, to:
- Amend the OIA to remove parliament’s exemptions
- Amend the Citizen’s Initiated Referenda Act to lower the triggering threshold, make results binding (with Minister of Finance and AG veto) and introduce the ability for any law passed by the Government to be subject to a referenda if a signature threshold is met 90 days after royal assent (as is the case in Switzerland)
@ Spud – quite right. However they can’t pinch Labour values or Labour’s principles of working together as equals so we can express those things freely and strongly
Ooooh, Red Alert is the place to be Clare, nice.
This is why we love you Clare
The bearer of good news. Very glad to hear Labour is doing this. Excited to see what it will look like.
@ Spud you’re right.
And it will be important that Labour isn’t seen to be: “Out of ideas! It is asking loyal followers what to think, what to say! The Labour Party has no imagination and no ideas of their own……” Can you hear John Key crowing in Parliament as he and the others did for the image survey?
Maybe it would be better to present an idea for discussion and comment? Otherwise a great grassroots plan.
@Ianmac Hold your horses. And wait for more posts. If you read the post you’d see there is a process and a set of guiding principles to be outlined.
The first post will outline the process and how you can participate.
The second will present some initial principles and ideas to generate discussion.
Dear Clare – I think I’m falling in love with you. You’ve got some spectacular ideas and seem to have a clear commitment to open democracy. We need more MPs like you on both sides of the house.
You mention #OpenLabourNZ – what happens if I don’t tweet or twitter and won’t every tweet or twitter? I’m confused by what you mean when you use terminology such as ‘hash tag’, indicating use of twitter.
I have used PBWiki in the past, and it would be good to participate on a wiki platform. I recall several years ago the Police tried doing a wiki-platform development of policy; the idea was so successful but unfortunately pulled down because of juvenile wingnuts ruining the whole thing by a cascade of obnoxious edits. So to avoid the juvenile wingnuts you’d need strong moderation and oversight.
I’d love to see more openness on what lobbying happens. Some place where “I just meet with xyz group” is shared. So we can alert with “you talked to xyz, but you really oughta talk to abc group too, cos they have a completely different angle on it.”
Too often a group presents their view as the only view, and I can forgive Labour MPs who make mistakes like assuming that the Recording Industry association’s claim to represent all musicians. Mistakes, like the horrendous s92a could be averted if there was somewhere to say, in a timely fashion: “hey, here’s where you find the musicians who refuse to join APRA”.
…like the Greens do, you mean…?
Be careful not to make it so that others can pinch your ideas.
What if that means the ideas get implemented?
You’re going to need to police this heavily to prevent right-wing trolls from attempting to disrupt and sabotage the project.
@Idiot/Savant Red Alert is reasonably well moderated. Call me an idealist, but I believe that this process will occur with people largely participating in good faith. I have faith in the community of interested people to discourage trolls. Maybe that’s idealist, but that’s one of the interesting things about the evolution and maturity of the online community.
I think this is a fantastic idea. I recently joined Labour and its great to see such proactive and progressive ideas taking place. I look forward to contributing my opinions and ideas in an open and transperant forum with other party members, towards the future of the Party’s policy and direction. It is an important step to harness new technologies as a way to open discussion between the public, party membership and its representatives in Parliament, (as red alert has done) and the mechanism of the internet, blogs, twitter etc can facilitate this activity in a very immediate and direct fashion. I look forward to OpenLabourNZ, Good on you Clare, regards.
StephenR: a justifiable concern. However you can expect the right to be only able to steal the shell of ideas and not the values and principles which would actually make the detail work. And to the electorate, the values and the principles need to be pushed just as hard as the policy detail. (Maybe more so because that stuff connects).
Great idea, the more voices we hear the more we can find commonalities, connect, develop policy that truly unites Labour and the people.
I wouldn’t be too concerned about the notion of ideas being pinched. If you’re the one who keeps generating the good ideas, that will become apparent soon enough.
Really like this concept.
Politicans ideas are not their own property; once you are an MP your fresh ideas become the property of the tax-payer. Don’t be like Hide and English; the taxpayer is God, you are their lowly servants.
Clare at 11:12. Fair enough. Will wait and see. As always I’m all for innovation but also aware of how the other side can abuse and twist good intentions. Cheers.
Fantastic news Clare and a great idea.
David – “If you’re the one who keeps generating the good ideas, that will become apparent soon enough.”
Yep cos thats what happened to the Alliance/Progressives right?
Anyway aside from that snark I also wanted to point to the Greens open government policy – http://www.greens.org.nz/policy/open-government-policy
Provides an excellent framework for things we should be working on.
My Favourites: Extending the OIA to Parliament
Whoops hit submit by accident….. continued here:
Overhauling the OIA
Prompt publishing of Cabinet documents
Fixed Election Date
Also I have been vocal about the need for Civics education in our schools, to introduce youth to the political system and its institutions. An interactive programme which also allows input from parents.
A ‘citizens reading’ as part of the legislative process (can be done through changes to the select committee process.)
Creating a much stricter regime and rating of OIA for departments and Ministers.
Andrew I teach law to Sport Management and Coaching students at Tertiary level. They DO seem to be taught at Sec school (not sure how many retain it), about our parliamentary system etc
I think they get some Social Studies courses when they first attend high school, at a pretty young age and to be honest the detail is often pretty lax, some teachers go further but they are a definite minority, and risk angering parents when they do it in their own way. Some youth with an interest develop their own knowledge. Much better in my opinion to have a proper curriculum which is acceptable to parents and schools.
Glad to hear that some of your students have picked it up though.
Another step toward democracy.
@Daniel
I have a policy, introduce a world drinking day
They already have that Spud, generally called Friday… No..?
@ Jeremy – actually there is a wide choice: Thu, Fri or Sat are all available, sometimes a non-exclusive combination is used too
On a more serious note: teaching young people about (for ex.) the role of the judiciary, other democratic institutions, central govt versus local govt, concepts of conflict of interest, freedom of association, transparency etc. even in an elementary sense would be of huge help to nz society.
Agreed, it would help them, some of them to understand that “systems” are no more than the people, and that they are part of the “people”. Too many peolple are becoming, or have become disconnected from the “system” and see it as a thing which is done to them or around them and sometimes affects them but is nothing more than an annoyance and they cant affect it.
Excellent idea – this is exactly what some of us have been hinting at for sometime – vision is fine, but it must be followed by strategic planning and goal setting. I have been wanting to know what the strategic plan is for Lab for sometime – to help shape that from the grassroots pov is magic.
Has the team brainstormed ways to get this fantastic idea out to the wider pubic – those who do not know red alert exists?
WHat are the rules around some prime adverts asking the public for their say? Are you allowed to or is that breaking the rules?
It is fantastic to see the party is starting to come out of the ‘old school’ haze it has been under for sometime – this is the 21st century and we need 21st century thinking to occur, not keep living in the old days of politics. New thinking, new blood and new energy – that is what we need (and yes, spud, I can hear you now – I acknowledge that we learn from the past and we need some wise heads…)
We are tasked with teaching our students with 21st century values, attributes and skills – so its good to see Lab walk the talk.
ps wikis is a good idea…
The problem with ‘Civics’ or ‘Politics’ or ‘Government’ or whatever you want to call it being taught in schools is ensuring that teachers don’t cross the dividing line between imparting factual information about institutions and move into expressing opinions on policies and ideologies which are partisan.
By the time people get to University if they opt to do Politics/Government type courses they generally have an interest, have developed opinions of their own and can control for lecturer bias of whatever type. School children are a different matter.
When my daughter was in year 9 her class was told by her humanities teacher who was an environmental zealot that Christchurch was the second most polluted city in the world (no qualification). Clearly she wasn’t very well travelled!
“They already have that Spud, generally called Friday… No..?” – Not like I want to do it
We have St Paddy’s Day and it’s great! But how about an all inclusive multicultural booze day? 
-Mini Oktoberfests, Saki drinking games, Whiskey poetry competitions. 
Clare – great initiative, but you have to decide what to do if you end up with a ‘Hundred Flowers’ type of result.
If you find that party opinion is well out of line with the public will you be ready to flex, or will public opinion be described as populist or similar and told to get back into line?
If not, will you simply adopt the Gordon Brown ‘cross the fingers behind your back, pretend to be in tune with public sentiment but in private call them bigots’ approach?
It’s no use asking people what they think if you don’t intend to act on what you hear.
George – Valid point, and that has been what has stopped previous attempts, a fear of ‘indoctrination’. Thats why I want to include parent’s views every step of the way, through consultation, several trial periods (with parents included as well as kids), and the ability to access the lessons and data through the internet so they can view all information that is being given in class. Including civics in the curriculum could even protect students from, shall we call them, ‘adverse opinions’ (from the parents perspective) because of the stricter formulation of lessons, and the training of teachers.
This from the party that wrote the Electoral Finance Act? The party that gave us “three strikes” in the Copyright Act? {Balance deleted: This is an unsubstantiated allegation and is not relevant to the post, Grant}
I’ll be watching with interest. And skepticism. But still interest.
George said: The problem with ‘Civics’ or ‘Politics’ or ‘Government’ or whatever you want to call it being taught in schools is ensuring that teachers don’t cross the dividing line between imparting factual information about institutions and move into expressing opinions on policies and ideologies which are partisan.
This is certainly not a problem. Just ensure that the basic arguments on both sides are laid out and critically thought about in the classroom.
School is not just for memorising, it is for learning to think and critique.
Far from “indoctrination” as you remark Andrew, you will help develop accurate critical thinking and questioning skills.
Some parents my find that useful being involved as well, as you suggest.
I thought it was quite clear my use of the term ‘indoctrination’ was tongue in cheek. However I have met on numerous occasions people who hold these views and have used that word, both teachers and parents.
Other than that comment, I agree wholeheartedly with you. The turnout at the 2008 general election was one of the lowest on record, and our local body election turnout figures are terrible. To state the obvious, when people take an interest in politics and realise its effects on their lives then the legislative and governing process is keenly scrutinised and better held to account.
Engagement with politics can have major benefits for both the individual and society as a whole. It might even create change in the media and political environement (wont hold my breath just yet though)
Beyond Representational Democracy (published December 2007)
The principles of open source; that is community and freedom, are now seeping out beyond the technical roots of the open source movement and impacting on the wider community. The Internet has been an enabler, while the open source community has been a proof of concept for community based development of content.
I think it is fair to say that there is a crisis of confidence in two party systems in which opposing political parties take turns in governing while the population have no real control of detailed policy. Democracy by way of three year vote is a very blunt instrument.
The core problem with this system is that it sets up a confrontational, ideological, bureaucratic and ineffective Government. In the past we simply have not a viable alternative. With the advent of the Internet we now have the technology to cooperate on a large scale to develop policy and legislation.
Ask yourself, is there any reason that we cannot now allow everyone with the will and expertise to directly be involved with development of legislation? Can we not allow people to become involved at every stage of law making?
In drafting law why not allow anyone to propose legislation? Why not allow anyone to discuss, critique and submit amendments? Ultimately it might be possible to develop two or more competing drafts, and to then allow the people to vote for the one to be proposed in Parliament.
Could we rid ourselves of the archaic categories of left and right wing and instead develop policy based on evidence and reasoned thought? Could we decide policy by putting forward legislation carefully considered by the broadest collection of people? Could we reverse hundreds of years of tradition and embrace a brave new world of open government?
I dread asking questions like this because someone will answer “yes”. Then they will ask me to lead some idealistic crusade. I’m not going to do that. A better plan would be to ask our own politicians to support open government. If a third party was started it would only impale itself on the ramparts of the two party political system. The better solution would be to show our political representatives that there is a way beyond the crisis of confidence we have in the political system. Technology provides the path, Freedom will light the way.
———-
Clare, thank you for taking the first steps. I know that the full vision isn’t yet broadly appreciated, but hopefully it will. I will enjoy discussing everyones ideas so we can forge a New Kind Of Politics.
Regards,
Peter Harrison
Great. Looking forward to contributing some good ideas; I’m sure Im not the only one here, there is a plethora of really inovative ideas out there in the wider Labour community. I really hope we don’t get hung up on the kudos of whose ideas they are, just get them adopted. One of the first things we should consider around this is that we have to stop the tendancy to base policy around a 3 year budget, we have to think way further ahead than that.
Loota says: “This is certainly not a problem. Just ensure that the basic arguments on both sides are laid out and critically thought about in the classroom.
School is not just for memorising, it is for learning to think and critique.
Far from “indoctrination” as you remark Andrew, you will help develop accurate critical thinking and questioning skills.”
I’m sure that many parents wouldn’t share your confidence, especially when people like John Minto and that spy base vandal are qualified to stand in front of classes of children unsupervised.
@Chris 11.27pm
Thanks for your question regards the use of the OpenLabourNZ #tag. You’re right that the term ‘hash tag’ instead of just ‘tag’ is somewhat Twitter specific, but Twitter is just one of the ways you can contribute.
If you’d like to blog about the OpenLabourNZ topic, you can use the tag there so we can find and incorporate your blog post into the process. Or if you prefer, you can just comment here.
And if you are able, can you attack a link from this post or subsequent ones about OpenLabourNZ to your blog post so people can link back to this processs. Hope that makes sense.
We’re very likely to use a wiki later in the process, once the first draft of the OpenLabourNZ document has been produced.
I look forward to your contributions.
Would wiki own the content of our posts?
@everyone. Great comments so far. So much material to work with already. Lots of questions and some hard issues, particularly around not paying lipservice to an open policy. Will acknowledge upfront that is a biggie and something that myself and others are thinking about a lot.
I really like the beginnings of a discussion around civics. I feel very strongly about that issue, having left school myself (sometime ago) not really having a clue how the process of government and democracy worked. I did have a sense of the importance of having a vote and exercising it, but that came from my values.
Plan to put up another post tomorrow about the process we plan to use around #OpenLabourNZ
Another post about the guiding principles for the discussion on Sunday/Monday. Just keep expressing your views. Do it in your own forums as well as here, but make sure you connect somehow to Red Alert to let me know what you’re saying.
I’m pretty sure that in the terms and conditions that they own what people post there and can use it for stuff. I don’t like that.
@Spud. Don’t know. Will find out
Thanks, smile and flower.
@ Spud – I believe that wikipedia does not own the content per se but the content you put on there may be used widely and freely by others subject to certain licensing conditions. Follow the links on this webpage re: Creative Commons and GFDL licensing.
http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Rules
Quoting some other relevant info from wikipedia:
The rule of all the Wikipedias, including this one, is that nothing in the Wikipedia can be copyrighted by someone else. The exception is if Wikipedia editors (including named and unnamed editors) have permission to use it. This means that we are only allowed to copy things from books or from other web pages into the Wikipedia if the writer has said that anyone can copy these things and make changes to them.
The text contained in Wikipedia is copyrighted (automatically, under the Berne Convention) by Wikipedia contributors and licensed to the public under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). The full text of this license is at Wikipedia:Text of the GNU Free Documentation License.
I was thinking of Wiki blogs, wetpaint etc. I’m too tired to keep blogging, thanks for the info
