Open Government Partnership
Framer: Alan Hudson, Global Integrity
Political transitions and tech:
- Adapting to political tarnsitions and challenges.
- Revising assumptions and approaches to technology.
- No blueprints for localising OGP.
- Evolving and tailored strategies.
- Value of learning journeys and exchanges.
- Increasing effectiveness and impact.
What might be the implications for OGP?
- Political transitions and tech.
- Multiple models, tailored approaches.
- Value of supporting real-time learning.
- … in country (sub-national) and cross-country…
- … about political (and technical ) challenges.
Host: Munyema Hasan, Open Government Partnership Support Unit
Panellists: Patrick Lim: INCITE-Gov; Maria Lauranti PRAKARSA; Suyoto Ngartep Mustaja: Regent, Bojonegoro Regency, Indonesia; Brendan Halloran, International Budget Partnership/OGP Independent Reporting Mechanism; Benjamin Diokno, Secretary of Budget and Management, Government of Philippines
While national level OGP frames the world-wide debate of open government, the sub-national level of OGP aims at being much more specific, ambitious and especially applied to the reality of citizens’ everyday life.
There is the belief, among political representatives, that transparency goes in detriment to power: “if I am transparent, people will not need the government, and I will be useless”. This is just false. On the contrary, transparency builds trust, and with trust comes legitimacy and thus more power to make decisions and to do things.
Open government — and the Open Government Partnership — is a political project, not a tool. OGP needs to be a wider project of open governance which builds openness norms to survive political transitions. Political transition is a constant. If a program is good, new governments should adopt it and improve it.
Open government is about citizen oriented governance.