Getting on with Government 2.0 - Department of Finance and ...

Some such as the ABC and the Powerhouse Museum in Sydney have made an excellent start in
doing this and they are recognised as global leaders.
Once again however this should not be an excuse for inaction or for perpetuating business
models which Web 2.0 is rendering obsolete. Some publishers have not just embraced the
openness of Web 2.0, but have used the leverage it gives them to increase their audience and
to drive lucrative new business models. Given its mission and its access to public funding, public
sector agencies should be vigorous in exploring similar approaches. They may find themselves in
the ideal position to explore what public goods might be built on the internet by public agencies
with their own sources of funding.
Certainly openness and using the available tools to provide open access — freely licensed and at
the marginal cost of distribution — must be a default position from which exceptions are argued.
The onus is on cultural institutions to adapt to Web 2.0 including most importantly, taking
advantage of the opportunities it offers.
Similarly some government research agencies like the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial
Research Organisation (CSIRO) seek to either sell or commercialise the intellectual property they
help bring about. While it would be unwise for the taskforce to recommend any blanket rule, the
Cutler Report found that research agencies are typically not particularly skilled at commercialising
their IP portfolios. And releasing IP will often generate greater economic benefits than retaining
private ownership, although it is often difficult for agencies to see this given that the economic
benefits arising from in such a strategy may be more diffuse and serendipitous — and so
unforeseeable. For these reasons, as with cultural institutions, research agencies should be
required to discharge a strong burden of proof before retaining IP themselves.
5.10 Whole of government information publication scheme
To encourage the public to contribute ideas and expertise and to collaborate in policy
development and service delivery, it is important that the community be as informed as possible.
The information publication scheme is one way in which this can occur. A well informed
community is, of course, also an essential driver for greater government accountability and
transparency.
The terms of reference of the taskforce require it to identify policies and frameworks to assist
the proposed OIC and other agencies in developing and managing a whole of government
information publication scheme to encourage greater disclosure of public sector information.
Requirements for an information publication scheme arise in the context of proposals for
amendments to the Commonwealth’s Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act). The Freedom
of Information Amendment (Reform) Bill 2009 (FOI Reform Bill) 254 establishes an information
publication scheme and sets out ten categories of information that agencies must publish.
In addition, the proposed scheme also includes provision for an agency to publish other
information at its discretion (guided by the objects of the FOI Act and guidelines to be issued
by the Information Commissioner). Importantly, the protections of the FOI Act from actions for
defamation, breach of confidence or infringement of copyright are extended to this discretionary
publication (Division 2, Clause 90 of the FOI Reform Bill).
The FOI Reform Bill also requires agencies to publish plans showing how they propose to
implement the scheme. Agency plans set out what information will be published through its
scheme, how and to whom it will publish the information and how it will otherwise comply
254 http://www.dpmc.gov.au/consultation/foi_reform/index.cfm or http://tinyurl.com/d7ywkt.
62
Engage: <strong>Getting</strong> on with Government 2.0 | report of the government 2.0 taskforce