e-participation case study: direct democracy portal "today i decide" by ms. nele leosk,...
TRANSCRIPT
Today I Decide (TOM)
Nele Leoske-Governance Academy (eGA)
Skopje, November 30, 2007
TOM - Government Initiative
● Main idea – to enhance public participation in political decision-making providing opportunity to propose and discuss new legislative initiatives via Internet
● Also- to enhance dialogue between citizens, public officials, etc
● Started in June, 2001● Administrated by State Chancellery● Promoted as Direct Democracy Portal
TOM - Two modes of operation
● Policy documents presented for discussion by ministries (functioned just 2 months, from 2008 under e-participation portal again)
● Proposals submitted by people● Only registered users can submit
proposals and participate in discussions● Everybody can follow discussions
Processing ideas● Idea is presented● 10 days for commenting, discussion● 3 days for editing● 3 days for secret voting
Only ideas getting more than half of votes in favour are considered further
● Ministry has 1 month for analysis and answer● Answer is posted on TOM
TOM statistics
● 1140 ideas presented (64% voted in, 34 % voted out)
● 654 proposals sent to the ministries (89% answered: 6% possible implementation, 48% negative, 7% supportive)
● 6910 registered users
● 100-150 visits per day (up to 300 when mentioned elsewere, eg in blogs, forums, etc)
● 7 proposals applied
Introduction of summer time
Wireless internet signs
Estonian anthem downloadable from the Internet
Visits to TOM
Visits to TOM: June 2001 to September 2006
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
June
200
1
Sep
t 20
01
Dec
200
1
Mar
200
2
June
200
2
Sep
t 20
02
Dec
200
2
Mar
200
3
June
200
3
Sep
t 20
03
Dec
200
3
Mar
200
4
June
200
4
Sep
t 20
04
Dec
200
4
Mar
200
5
June
200
5
Sep
t 20
05
Dec
200
5
Mar
200
6
June
200
6
Sep
t 20
06
New users of TOM (registered)
New users(monthly average in the given year)
050
100150200250300350400450
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
New ideas
0102030405060708090
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Positive sides of TOM● Possibility to rise political issues ● Obligation of state administration to respond● Communication between users (possibility to
form an idea together)● Communication with state administration● Everybody can follow proposals and
discussions
Problems of TOM
● Many non-constructive proposals
● Passive discussions
● Low level of the idea author’s ivolvement (35% participate in later phases)
● Few votes
● Small number of active users
● No publicity, buzz
● Rejection of proposals by state administration on formal grounds
● Little dialogue between citizens and political decision makers
● Few ideas implemented
Mobilising citizens
• Has to be advertised permanently in the Internet and other media
• a system of email or RSS notification linking authors and discussants is necessary to improve the quality and quantity of discussion of generated ideas
• database of ideas to signal previous attempts to address a problem and make it easier to mobilize users
• tracing the progress of the ideas once they have been delivered to the government
Increasing legislative impact
• ideas should also be circulated to a wider network of interested parties, including parliamentary committees, political parties and NGOs
• connect users to outside sources of information to help the drafting and commenting of ideas (legislation, etc)
• Indication of the policy priorities of government ministries
• revise and resubmit ideas that have received a negative answer from the relevant government ministry
