e-gov and compulsion

I've been holding off blogging the Work Foundation's launch of SmartGov [SmartGov: Renewing Electronic Government for Improved Service Delivery] this week, owing to the problems I'm having with the idea of compulsion.

Noah Curthoys - with James Crabtree - has produced an essay that argues for reform of the approach to e-gov, partly based on concentrating on increasing take-up through marketing e-gov to the affluent and able bodied - and then compelling them to use it. He has also highlighted good practice in Liverpool City Council, the Office of Government Commerce and North Wales Police, in the UK.

I think the compulsion agenda leads to some very important user groups been marginalised for the time being - and isn't that the only time that matters ;-). For example, most people who I know that are blind or disabled find the Internet one of their key resources: everything from the weekly shop to the national newspapers becomes available. For many disabled people, the Internet is more important than for sighted or able-bodied individuals - it's quite literally a lifeline, it enables and empowers. So why propose spending entire budgets on marketing to the able-bodied, when these eminently willing users are being marginalised by inaccessible websites? (for example)

Well, the whole idea of compulsion was very contentious at the launch, held on Wednesday eve. And the man from the office of the e-envoy didn't want to adorn that particular event, so other valuable members of the e-gov community were found to stand in his place. And it has to be said, the line-up was good, and far from being some kind of automatic endorsement, there were many conflicting but sensible ideas. Perhaps certain government advisors could do with reading Richard Sennett's recent column in The Guardian.

The evening's proceedings might have been improved by having present (a) some of the people who designed the services described and (b) some of the people who use them.