Fwd: [ogp] A call to action for the OGP Ottawa summit

Dear network - please see note from Nathaniel Heller (OGP Civil Society Co-Chair) about potential commitments in action plans stemming from the Ottawa Global Summit. Without an action plan, this seems like something not to have to think about, but I will be checking with DCMS officials to see if they are planning something, as I am sure we do not want a surprise commitment with no engagement with civil society!

Dear friends – With apologies for a second mass email in as many weeks, I wanted to share with the OGP civil society community an important message sent to all
OGP ministers earlier this week. In the letter, the OGP co-chairs (Minister Joyce Murray of the government of Canada and myself) call on OGP governments and civil society to view the summit as an opportunity to deliver concrete actions addressing the summit’s
key themes and focal areas: gender and inclusion, civic space, and strengthening democratic governance in the digital age. While this call to action by no means replaces the core OGP co-creation process around national and local commitments, we hope to see
a number of governments, in partnership with civil society, delivering and highlighting a range of existing and new commitments around these topics in Ottawa.

I encourage you to ask your respective government counterparts if they have received the letter, and to urge them to distribute the letter to your respective domestic
OGP multi-stakeholder forum (MSF). We hope that MSFs will explore how the Summit can be an action-forcing moment to increase the ambition of your country’s current OGP Action Plan, and/or to commit to an ambitious commitment in your next OGP Action Plan.

Many thanks,

Nathaniel Heller

OGP Civil Society Co-Chair

(Attachment attachments-replaced-with-links.txt is missing)


Excuse this direct email, but the protocol for this forum is far from clear. However, this is an attempt to bring to your attention, an innovative and unique App “Informed Choice – ic!” which meets all the criteria for wiping out the democratic deficit as well as instituting a powerful, all-pervading yet benign form of governance – universal transparency. Both sides of the divide need help when it comes to decision-making. Those making the decisions are charged with making the best choice, transparently and with accountability. Whilst those affected by decisions made in their name are disenfranchised, playing no or little part in the process and are left bewildered by how any such decision was made – the process is far from transparent, and further complicated by party politics. In short, neither side has been trained in the art of decision-making, and certainly not in a way which is understood by the population at large.

Ic! is a methodology which is structured thus enabling those involved to focus on the individual elements. Also, it copes with any number of participants (inclusion, empowerment) to express their own views on any subject and in a universally understandable ‘language’. From this data, ic! always identifies their collective best choice, ergo unity and commitment. And because the decision can be understood by any interested party, we have accountability. Above all, this invokes transparency thereby revealing incompetence, ignorance, corruption and nepotism, all of which are often disguised by the prevailing ‘dark art’ of decision-making. It is also discrimination-blind, non-partisan and egalitarian – the banes of present-day party politics.

Finally, with the App available free of charge, but on a website which eschews all commercial influences, it is beyond reproach (unlike comparison websites). Professors of Decision Theory have proclaimed ic! to be “ingeniously simple” making it easy to use and understand. In any way, this is the route to government of the people, by the people and for the people (at last!). Transparency, we contend, is more tha Open Data and the channels related – the decision-making process itself is germane to the task.

If this is prima facie of interest to the architects of Open Government, then the opportunity to present ic! and debunk many fallacies in the process, will be most welcome. Your response will be most welcome, even if it is “thanks, but no thanks” – we don’t really mind, so long as we know.

Kindest regards

Michael La Costa

Suitably untitled

Informed Choice – ic!

Andreas Pavlou via Open Government Forum opengovernment1@discoursemail.com