tom'riik'ee - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 10
About This Presentation
Title:

tom'riik'ee

Description:

tom.riik.ee. A state-supported internet system TOM ... TOM as one aspect of participation. Defend and explain the proposals by users in discussions ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:23
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 11
Provided by: tt8100
Category:
Tags: ee | riik | tom

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: tom'riik'ee


1
TOM - Enhance Public Participation in Public
Decision making
  • tom.riik.ee
  • A state-supported internet system TOM
  • of public proposals for legislation in Estonia
  • Patron Prime Minister
  • Administration Prime Ministers office

2
How it works?
  • Proposals
  • Proposals submitted by people via internet
  • Legislation projects from the ministeries
  • Participation
  • Everybody can read the materials
  • You have to register (no restrictions) in order
    to submit, comment, vote and sign

3
Pipeline
People
4
(No Transcript)
5
(No Transcript)
6
Background internet in Estonia
  • Basic facts
  • Ca 1.400.000 inhabitants
  • Ca 20.000 state and local government officials
  • Inhabitants between 15 and 75
  • 36 have used internet during last 6 months
  • 25 have a PC at home
  • 13 are heavy internet users (active use every
    day)
  • Public sector
  • 95 of state officials have PC-s with internet on
    their desk

7
Background e-government in Estonia
  • Existing
  • Cabinet meetings system
  • State portal and www sites for practically all
    institutions
  • Laws and proposals on the internet
  • TOM
  • In the implementation phase
  • Obligatory to publish all official documents on
    the web
  • Electronic ID card with electronic certificates
  • All state databases as web services (XML-RPC)
  • (Internet voting in local elections)

8
TOM statistics after six months
  • High use, low active participation
  • 2629 registered users
  • 405 proposals submitted
  • 69 proposals removed
  • 83 proposals voted out
  • On the average there are 10 votes per proposal
  • On the average there are 7 signatures per
    proposal

9
Lessons learned
  • Receives a lot of publicity in the press
  • A large number of passive readers
  • A large number of proposals
  • Fun, quick, transparent
  • Most proposals are short and sketchy, many
    repetitions
  • Most proposals are not directly legislation
    proposals
  • Relatively few votes and signatures
  • Users are de facto anonymous

10
Crucial for success in the future
  • Involving more civil society, NGO-s
  • TOM as one aspect of participation
  • Defend and explain the proposals by users in
    discussions
  • Eliminate stuped ideas
  • Edit the proposals put them into a processable
    form
  • Top level support for processing in state
    machinery
  • Collecting and publishing feedback from the state
    machinery
  • Authentication of users
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com