e-GOVERNMENT IN FINLAND - ePractice.eu

75. When asked about concern over privacy and security, the Data Protection Ombudsman felt that
on-going concern over privacy issues was the best way to maintain citizen trust and to play a preventive
role with regard to privacy abuses. He cited a 2001 study by a Finnish law office and an international
accounting firm, which asked 400-500 data controllers in both public and private organisations what they
thought about data protection. Most listed data protection as the number one problem. However, when
asked the question, “When your customer has problems, what are they based on?”, data protection figured
in last place.
76. According to the Data Protection Ombudsman, a May 2000 study asked Finns how they use their
mobile phones. The study indicated that people are not concerned about data use and trust the Finnish
authorities and companies. However, they are interested in knowing who collects data and who uses it and
to have a say when their data is used. The bigger concern was that neighbours should not have access to
their data. It is important that the data protection authority be transparent in order to ensure that people
know what the instruments are that provide protection.
77. In Finland, there seems to be a sentiment that, while it is important to remain vigilant, existing
privacy protection is sufficient. Interviews with government officials and consumer groups seemed to
support the view that the administration is unlikely to abuse data and that it is rational to use data that is
already in the possession of other administrative authorities, thereby reducing data collection costs. While
it may be an overstatement to construe this as “trust”, it at least shows that Finns are willing to give their
government the benefit of the doubt.
78. Privacy concerns remain high, but they seem to be focused more on technical implementation
than on regulatory protection. The issue of legislation was commonly raised in interviews, but the low
relative ranking of legislative and regulatory issues in the OECD survey seems to indicate that current
regulations are adequate, though not always sufficiently clear. From an agency perspective, privacy,
security and authentication were raised as the most important technical issues (see Figure 3.4 and Part 3.3
on technological barriers) and therefore as an important barrier to the development of more advanced
services permitting transactions with citizens and businesses. The appropriate response to those technical
concerns would be additional technical assistance on how to establish adequate privacy protection based on
the existing public key infrastructure, rather than additional legislation or regulations.
Key Points - 12
x Privacy and security are real concerns, but they have also been used as excuses to not
advance. Current regulatory and oversight protections seem to be adequate. Some of the
privacy concerns in Finland may focus more on the technical ability of agencies to deliver
secure services.
3.2 Budgetary barriers
79. E-government is broader than ICT use in government, yet the investment in government
information systems forms the basis for changes in the structure, processes, practices and, eventually,
culture of public organisations. The OECD’s The E-government Imperative (2003) lays out a number of
budgetary barriers which play an important role in a government’s ability to make constructive ICT
investments. Many of these considerations focus on the ability to use the allocation and control aspects of
the public budget to make intelligent, flexible and accountable investment decisions, rather than being
hemmed in by rigid budgetary rules.
41