*** Democracies Online Newswire - http://www.e-democracy.org/do *** Clift comments at the end. Being a "wired" elected official. by Jan Hamming Alderman, Tilburg, The Netherlands [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.tilburg.nl/hamming The importance of the Internet in society is growing very rapidly. If we extrapolate the developments of the past three years over the next three years, then in three years time everyone in the Netherlands will be online (at work, at home, or through institutions like libraries), the transfer speed for data will have increased by a factor of 14, and the share of Internet trade in the BBP will have grown to 30%. Clearly, the number of people that have access to the Internet is increasing, and with that so are the expectations that people have of organisations such as the government. Joining in digital conversations concerning policy, voting with your PC at election times and referenda are only a few examples. My website, http://www.tilburg.nl/hamming was one of the first websites in the Netherlands, where e-government came together. I hope my website helps citizens in finding their ways into public administration and contacting politicians and civil servants. Although e-democracy is far more than this, I hope being a wired elected official can contribute. I feel it is important that, as being an elected official, we should not only talk about the gap between citizens and administration, we should actually do something. We should not just stay in the ivory tower, sitting on velvet, but also going into the city and making policy together with the people. Not 'doing' interaction for interaction's sake, but having real objectives to make the people stronger. In answer to the question of whether the Internet should be used to bring politics closer to the person in the street, I feel that it could be a useful tool - a supplement to personal contact. It is not surprising, then, that I am an alderman who believes in practical experience, who regularly visits the city's neighbourhoods, shares a cup of coffee with the residents, involves the youth in making policy. And the Internet is an important aid in all this. That is why I have started an Internet site - in this case with the intensive help of the target group, namely young people - in order to explain in a clear and understandable way how public administrators work and how direct contact can be made with citizens. I know now that my contacts, especially with youth, low income and ethnic groups are improving through the virtual contacts. One of the reasons, I think, these groups visit the Internet is that the tool is fast, approachable, impersonal and has no face and no voice (although this is changing again soon). Moreover, on the Internet, everyone is equal! Knowledge is more accessible and transfereable, despite place or time. In my weekly chats (every Tuesday-evenings) I try not to open with a disclaimer, but try to keep the discussion open and approachable, by not determining the discussion on forehand. During the chat all sorts of questions are asked, there is no limit and sometimes I just do not know the answer and have to come back to it. Questions cover from 'where do I have do pay dog-tax', to 'what is Tilburg going to look like in ten years'? On the other hand, these advantages can also be disadvantages. The advantages, having no rules, and the anarchic character, sometimes frightens politicians and the management of organisations. Internet is said to interfere with other people's portfolios, is too open and too quick, has no 'real content', means extra work (every day I answer 45 emails), and organisations like the municipality always want to wait for memoranda, and trying to embed new policy in the rolling projects and existing policies. But Internet also helps to work more effectively and efficiently. The city Intranet is a good example. Internet also has an important network and antenna function. I am online for almost two years (since October 1999), and more than 4000 visitors visited my site. Recently it is decided that other councillors are going online after the coming summer holiday break. In the past few years I can conclude some success factors for the Internet. Traffic should be generated, the Internet compels clear and lucid communication and there are heavy consequences for the organisation itself. First, visitors are important to keep, it should be interesting to visit the website more than once. In practice this means, installing webcams, renewing existing information at least once a week, organising chat marathons. The Internet compels clear and lucid communication, which means policies should be explained in few words and meanings. Last but not least, consequences for the organisation are the following: acting fast is obligated, there is the constant pressure of updating regularly, and a webmaster should be installed to defend the corporate message and form. I really hope that e-governing helps developing the processes of interactive policy making. With that, elected officials will more and more say what they mean and mean (do) what they say. Then in the end, the people get stronger, next to elected officials. Their role (elected officials) will be changing and function more in bringing individual needs and wants together in the overall policies. COMMENTS FROM STEVEN CLIFT I asked Jan to write up an essay about his use of the Internet (actively supported by capable city staff) as an elected official. His official elected official government web site is the closest thing I have seen to a virtual constituent office. While candidates and parties will always have "vote for X" sites, even political non-election year "campaign" sites, Jan is helping set the stage for a next generation of official online front doors for citizens looking to be represented. While the typical local council or parliamentary member directory with a picture, a short biography, and contact information is a start, it is a woefully inadequate toolkit for effective representation in the information age. We need to learn from the leading online constituent offices and encourage open source and commercial tools that help representative institutions move all their members (not just the 5% who get it) in the right direction. Jan's experiences related to how the net as part of an overall approach can be used to help break down the democratic divide that often limits the participation of young people and low income and ethnic groups is something to build upon. What is more representative - an intimidating public hearing scheduled while most people work or "on your own time" participation built in as a complementary "real" part of representative democracy? (Those who say we should address the digital divide first before using the Internet in democracy are a great barrier to creating a citizen expectation that when they get online they can "do" democracy as well as shop and be entertained. Build democracy online now or it will never exist.) Steven Clift Democracies Online http://www.e-democracy.org/do P.S. If you'd like reach almost 2,000 people with an essay on your practical use of the Internet in democracy, drop me a note: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ^ ^ ^ ^ Steven L. Clift - W: http://www.publicus.net Minneapolis - - - E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minnesota - - - - - T: +1.612.822.8667 USA - - - - - - - ICQ: 13789183 *** Please send submissions to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** To subscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** Message body: SUB DO-WIRE *** *** To unsubscribe instead, write: UNSUB DO-WIRE *** *** Please forward this post to others and encourage *** *** them to subscribe to the free DO-WIRE service. ***
