The government decided to create a single electronic system of interaction with citizens and transfer the key administrative services to the Internet. This is where the process halted.
E-government has long been a reality not only in distant countries like Singapore, the US or Sweden, but also in former Soviet countries, such as Georgia, Moldova or Estonia.
Back in the 1990s these nations realized that transition to an electronic system of procurement could save up to 50 percent of the typical expenses from the state budget. Due to e-procurement, Georgia saved $200 million in just two years. Moldova is currently actively advancing the idea of a single datacenter, on the basis of which government agencies are providing unified services to citizens.
Ukraine, however, is trying to live by old habits. The latest promise the government made to the world community is Ukraine’s accession to the international Open Government Partnership Initiative. It was launched in September 2011 in order to introduce standards of openness and transparency of governments’ actions. To date 57 countries, Ukraine included, have joined the initiative.
The Ukrainian government adopted a national action plan for the implementation of the open government idea with the following priorities:
- community participation;
- counteraction to corruption;
- access to information;
- administrative services; and
- e-governance.
But again, there has been no progress beyond adopting the action plan.
Can it be done otherwise? The experience of our neighbors shows that it can. Jointly with their partners in Russia, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Moldova, Transparency International Ukraine analyzed the government’s actions of implementing the open government plan.
Their attention was centered on government participation, nongovernmental organization participation, community participation, implementation infrastructure, financial resources, image of e-government, general communication, and partners engagement.
It’s not difficult to see the interdependence of the indexes of infrastructure development of e-governance and the level of a government’s engagement in its implementation. The high political will in all the countries, except for Ukraine, is also obvious.
There’s something we can learn from our neighbors – in Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Moldova. E-governance is working. In Georgia, public procurement is carried out online. In Armenia, an interactive budget has been adopted; the sessions of the government are transmitted online.
Moldova’s leadership cherished an ambitious plan to complete an e-transformation by 2020, i.e., to switch over to a total electronic form of reporting.
In Russia, the idea of e-governance is becoming fashionable due to the government's propaganda machine and the support of key media people behind it.
In Ukraine, Russia and Azerbaijan, the idea of e-governance forced the authorities to greater interaction with the public.
Incidentally, participation of non-government sector is practically the only indicator in which Ukraine has achieved a high score. Because of active NGO involvement, 80 percent of the national action plan consists of their proposals.
In all the countries we reviewed the citizens know very little about the e-governance. In Armenia, 5 percent of the population has some knowledge of the project, for instance.
Some countries are taking actions to increase public awareness and engagement. Georgia is holding student competitions to improve the action plan, while Moldova is engaging senior students for internship at government departments for e-transformation.
In Ukraine there are four key dangers in implementation of e-government plan:
Lack of an efficient coordination mechanism between the government agencies responsible for the Open Government Partnership Initiative and between the government and NGOs.
Inadequate quality of enacted legislation.
Insufficient budget funds for implementing the “electronic governance.”
Deadlines are impossible to observe due to the highly bureaucratic process of decision-making that causes substantial delays.
To advance the implementation of e-governance, both the authorities and the NGOs need to create an efficient permanent mechanism for communication. Also, the government should get serious about control and management of e-governance action plan. The government is not experienced enough in conducting a transparent dialogue with NGOs and needs support and recommendations in establishing the much-needed communication mechanism.
---
Autor(en)/Author(s): Oleksii Khmara, Olena Kifenko, Olga Tymchenko
Quelle/Source: Kyiv Post, 05.03.2013
Bitte besuchen Sie/Please visit:
