= Input about Free Software for German OGP action plan published =
[ Read online: https://fsfe.org/news/2017/news-20170328-01.en.html ]
Today the civil society "working group OGP (Open Government Partnership)
Germany" (Arbeitskreis OGP Deutschland) published its input for a German
OGP action plan [1]. The goal of the Open Government actions is to
increase transparency, citizen friendlyness, reporting, and
effectiveness of governments and administrations. The input, which was
already handed over to the German Government on 20 March, consists of 30
Open Government topics, including a section about Free Software.
In December 2016 Germany joined the Open Government Partnership. Until
June 2017 a German action plan is to be developed and decided by the
German government.
To achieve this, on 17 February 2017 the German government invited
representatives from the civil society to a workshop to develop input
for a German action plan for the upcoming two years. After the workshop
members of civil society groups further developed the suggestions
published today. In the weeks to come the German federal ministries will
examine the different suggestions, debate internally, and draft a
national action plan with concrete goals. There will also be another
workshop to discuss the goals between administrations and the civil
society (see the German timetable for the action plan by the German
Government [2] ).
The OGP action plan will not just address the federal government but
should also affect administrations in the German federal states and
municipalities.
== Input from the civil society about Free/Open Source Software ==
The Free Software Foundation Europe worked together with other German
Free Software organisations and the "working group OGP Germany" to
summarise the topic of Free Software in the Open Government context and
develop concrete action items for the government.
By publishing the input we hope to enable civil society actors around
the world to learn about the OGP discussion in Germany, adapt
suggestions to other countries' contexts, and to enable people to give
further input to the German debate.
Below a rough translation of our input originally written in German.
(The full submission is available in German at the website for the
workgroup OGP [3].)
=== Introduction into the topic ===
Open Government offers the possibility to make the activities of the
state more persistent and plausible for its citizens. Open software
achieves this with its open/free licensing which is proved as an
international standard. The "Open Government Toolbox" sums up 1928
IT projects from 523 organisations to help in the transition to Open
Government. The spectrum of this stunning collection shows the
potential of Open Government software. From data visualisation to
participation tools and on up to tools for local urban initiatives,
numerous projects for administration and civil society are already
freely accessible.
- *Recycling*: Open Software can be used for various purposes and can be
re-used. Once it is developed in the scope of a governmental tender,
the software code can then be used by other administrations for
similar problems. A good example is "Fix My Street": originally
developed as a reporting tool for damage on roads in the United
Kingdom, it is now also being used in Switzerland, Ireland, Malaysia,
Norway, Sweden, Uganda and Uruguay. As additionally developed
extensions to the software and user experiences are shared between
nations, all users benefit from the increasing use.
- *Independence*: The use of Open Software offers more opportunities for
procurement and selection of partners. A strategic "lock-in", a
dependency on certain vendors, is avoided as the code can be
maintained by other market competitors as well.
- *Neutrality of platforms*: With open standards the public authorities
can achieve more platform neutrality. Thereby they are no longer
dependent on certain vendors and can choose a new one at any time.
- *Transparency*: While conventional government software is a blackbox
and is a proprietary secret, the source code of Open Government
software is basically always available.
- *Participation*: The Open Source code combined with a free license
allows synergies of government agencies (with civil society),
enterprises and citizens. Software provided by the state can be
maintained and used by external users - and vice versa. Open
Government software projects initiated by the state give an impetus
for collaborative projects where various perspectives from
administration, civil society, enterprises and citizens come together.
For the implementation of the Open Government road map, new software
will be developed. Open Government software should be accessible
under a suitable Free/Open license [1] to enable re-use and sharing
of solutions between authorities, companies and citizens.
=== Our vision until 2030: ===
Federal, regional and local administrations share their solutions
with other administrations, companies and civil society. For new
solutions, the participants can refer to a collection of pre-
existing solutions, re-use and improve these and share them with
everyone. All solutions guarantee use independent of the used
platform. Neither citizens, companies nor administrations should be
technically discriminated against. These German software solutions
enjoy an excellent reputation in administrations, civil society, and
commercial enterprises around the world. People enjoy using them and
they are further developed by other programming groups. Therefore
this results in investment protection and a higher sustainability
for the public sector, which will be developed further by third-
parties, even if individual German administrative authorities opt
for other solutions.
=== Further information sources and links: ===
- [1] Free/Open Source licensing model: See also the list of the Free
Software Foundation [4] and of the Open Source Initiative [5]
- OGP Toolbox [6]
- EU Joinup solutions [7]
- USA Portal Code.Gov [8]
- UK: Proof of concept [9]
- Fixmystreet UK [10] - Fixmystreet OGS [11]
- EUPL [12]
- Introduction into "Software Freedom" by FSFE [13]
=== Suggestions for commitments by the workshop for a NAP two-pager ===
- Level 1: Suggestions for organising the process Establishment of an
expert group, containing members of federal, state and municipal
administrations for re-use and sharing of open software for the state
and the administration (Re-use and Share OSS). Therefore, at least
twice a year, an internal dialogue can take place. There, the group
can tap into the topic of Open Source software and understand it in
terms of overlapping administrative needs. Due to this overlap,
employees from all levels of the public administrations should be
utilised as contributors and architects, and encouraged to integrate,
share, and promote more re-use of the administration's software.
- Establishment of a workgroup with members from administration, civil
society and companies for re-use and sharing of Free Software for the
state and the administration. The workshop should take place at least
twice a year to enable an exchange to listen to each other and receive
feedback by the civil society for further conceptional development.
There should be a strong link between the workgroup and the referring
expert group (see paragraph above) in the administration. Thereby a
transfer of knowledge into the public administration, and indirectly
into politics, is ensured.
- Commissioning of a study running until December 2018 to do basic
research about the cooperation in public administrations in usage of
free/open software. It should consider both users and
business/development associations so that national and international
knowledge and practical experience from study and usage are taken into
account. The full potential, with the help of workshops (Collaborative
Design), should be outlined. With this approach, all relevant
perspectives and proposals for implementation are available for the
second National Action Plan.
- Conducting two "Plug Fest" [14] events in Germany until 2018 as Open
Collaborative Workshops, where special departments of local
authorities can be brought into technical dialogue with providers of
document editing solutions. With those multi stakeholder events many
countries in Europe have made positive experiences for increasing
interoperability.
- Commission of a scientific study about open standards and open
interfaces in public administrations (including open document formats)
by June of 2018. With this the national and international knowledge
and practical experience (Germany: SAGA 5.1.0, EU, Austria,
Switzerland, France, Italy, Netherlands) will be taken into account.
The full potential with the help of workshops (Collaborative Design)
should be outlined so all relevant possibilities and proposals should
be available for the second National Action Plan.
- Commission of an evaluation study about the accessibility and platform
neutrality of public web interfaces by the federal authorities until
January 2018. Through this we can achieve transparency about how
certain user groups are technically discriminated against by the
websites of the authorities and how these sites are accessible
regardless of used devices. Based on this evaluation, best practices
will be introduced simultaneously. Also, basic principles acting as
suggestions for creating accessible and vendor-neutral websites for
authorities as well as for public institutions will be presented.
- Level 2: Precise legislative steps and regulation requirements
Establishment of the EU ISA2 law regarding the platform neutrality in
the acquisition of web service until 2019, so that citizens can use
public sector services regardless of the technology used by the
citizens (Operating systems: Mac OS, Linux, Windows, Android /
Browser: Firefox, Chrome, Internet Explorer.../ Hardware: Tablet,
Desktop-PC, Smartphone, Thin Internet Client).
- Proposal for a law to set up a national software archive by 2019 which
clarifies where German authorities and suppliers should deposit and
store (long-term-archive) the source code, documentation, interface
specifications and database schemes of their software solutions. This
enables security checks and the preservation of our digital cultural
heritage.
- Level 3: Minimal measures (Mandatory programme) Software, which is
being commissioned or developed in the course of realising the OGP
action plan, should re-use free/open software components and should be
made accessible on the EU software platform joinup [15] and in the
"OGP Toolbox" [16] for other governments, companies and the civil
society.
- Capacity-generating measures for the participation of Germany in the
further development of the Free/Open Source Software Contributor
Policy Template in the OGP [17] (Bulgaria, France, the United Kingdom
and the United States of America have already pledged to do this).
- Until mid 2018 evaluation of which software, of those created during
the implementation of the IT-planning council's action plan for 2017,
can be made available in the OGP Toolbox under a free/open license by
2019. (See Action Plan [18] )
- Federal government, federal states, and municipalities should
communicate information about the cooperation between the authorities
and other participants regarding software solutions to the EU portal
Joinup for publication. This will make this kind of cooperation more
popular and persuades other entities to participate.
1: https://opengovpartnership.de/2017/03/2069/
2: http://www.verwaltung-innovativ.de/DE/Internationales/OGP/zeitlicher_ablauf…
3: https://opengovpartnership.de/files/2017/03/170323_Zivilgesellschaftliche_E…
4: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html
5: https://opensource.org/licenses/category
6: https://ogptoolbox.org/en/
7: https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/interoperability/search
8: http:///code.gov
9: https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/technology/making-source-code-open-and-re…
10: http://fixmystreet.com/
11: http://fixmystreet.org/
12: https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/community/eupl/og_page/european-union-public-li…
13: https://fsfe.org/about/basics/freesoftware.html
14: http://plugfest.opendocumentformat.org/
15: https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/
16: https://ogptoolbox.org/de/
17: https://github.com/DISIC/foss-contrib-policy-template
18: http://www.it-planungsrat.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Entscheidungen/21_Sitz…
== About the Free Software Foundation Europe ==
Free Software Foundation Europe is a charity that empowers users to
control technology. Software is deeply involved in all aspects of our
lives; and it is important that this technology empowers rather than
restricts us. Free Software gives everybody the rights to use,
understand, adapt and share software. These rights help support other
fundamental freedoms like freedom of speech, press and privacy.
The FSFE helps individuals and organisations to understand how Free
Software contributes to freedom, transparency, and self-determination.
It enhances users' rights by abolishing barriers to Free Software
adoption, encourage people to use and develop Free Software, and
provide resources to enable everyone to further promote Free Software
in Europe.
http://fsfe.org
= Freedomvote.nl helps voters compare party positions on digital
freedom in upcoming Dutch election =
[ Read online: https://fsfe.org/news/2017/news-20170302-01.en.html ]
Today FSFE Netherlands, NLnet, ISPConnect, and Open Source & Overheid
launch Freedomvote.nl [1] to help inform voters in the upcoming Dutch
general election, which is held on 15 March 2017. Freedomvote.nl
provides guidance to voters on the topic of digital freedom, based on
eight questions.
The website allows voters to compare their political views with those of
the parties participating in the election. The questions cover the
topics of Free and Open Source Software, open standards, open data, open
science, open education, surveillance, net neutrality and software
patents. Voters can answer these questions for themselves, save them,
and then compare the results with the answers from the political
parties. Descriptions are added to all the questions, to provide
context.
"Freedomvote fills a gap for the Dutch elections." explains Nico
Rikken from FSFE Netherlands. "As only a couple of parties have a
formal stance on themes of digital freedom, Freedomvote encourages
parties to take a stance, so voters who care about digital freedoms
know what they'll be voting for."
Unlike its Swiss predecessor [2], the Dutch Freedomvote model represents
the political parties rather than individual candidates, and thus
reflects the strong party orientation in the Netherlands' political
system. Freedomvote.nl is based on Free Software source code developed
for Freedomvote.ch. Further software improvements are in the works,
intended for others wanting to run their own Freedomvote in the future.
1: https://freedomvote.nl
2: https://freedomvote.ch/
== About the Free Software Foundation Europe ==
Free Software Foundation Europe is a charity that empowers users to
control technology. Software is deeply involved in all aspects of our
lives; and it is important that this technology empowers rather than
restricts us. Free Software gives everybody the rights to use,
understand, adapt and share software. These rights help support other
fundamental freedoms like freedom of speech, press and privacy.
The FSFE helps individuals and organisations to understand how Free
Software contributes to freedom, transparency, and self-determination.
It enhances users' rights by abolishing barriers to Free Software
adoption, encourage people to use and develop Free Software, and
provide resources to enable everyone to further promote Free Software
in Europe.
http://fsfe.org
= What happened in Munich =
[ Read online: https://fsfe.org/news/2017/news-20170301-01.en.html ]
On 15 February 2017, the city council of Munich, Germany convened to
discuss the future of their LiMux project. In its public session, the
plenary voted to have the city administration develop a strategy to
unify client-side IT architecture, building atop a yet-to-be-developed
"Windows-Basis-Client". A translation of the complete decision is
included further down.
The opposing parties were overruled, but the decision was amended such
that the strategy document must specify which LiMux-applications will no
longer be needed, the extent in which prior investments must be written
off, and a rough calculation of the overall costs of the desired
unification.
Since this decision was reached, the majority of media have reported
that a final call was made to halt LiMux and switch back to Microsoft
software. This is, however, not an accurate representation of the
outcome of the city council meeting. We studied the available
documentation and our impression is that the last word has not been
spoken.
We succeeded thus far in forcing the mayor Dieter Reiter (SPD) to
postpone the final decision, and this was possible through the
unwavering pressure created by joint efforts between The Document
Foundation, KDE, OSBA, and the FSFE together with all the individuals
who wrote to city council members and took the issue to the media.
Although the mandate is highly suggestive in that it suggests that the
existing vendor-neutral approach is to be replaced with a proprietary
solution, it leaves the door open; Or are you aware of a commonly-used
software standard that ensures maximal compatibility in all directions?
The new mandate buys us some time. And we will keep going.
== Background information ==
What lead to this public hearing on 15 February? In 2014, Dieter Reiter
was elected new mayor of Munich. He had referred to himself as
"Microsoft fan" even before he took office. He prides himself with
having played a major part in the decision to move the Microsoft Germany
headquarters to downtown Munich. He started to question the LiMux
strategy as soon as his term started, and asked Accenture, a Microsoft
partner in the same building as Microsoft, to analyse Munich's IT
infrastructure. The report can be found here [1] (German). It's
noteworthy that in their report, the analysts identify primarily
organisational issues at the root of the problems troubling LiMux
uptake, rather than technical challenges.
The coalition of SPD and CSU filed a surprise motion with minimal lead
time before the city council, with the goal to put LiMux to rest once
and for all.
== Our reaction ==
Given the importance of this matter, an ad-hoc coalition of The Document
Foundation, KDE, OSBA, and the FSFE collected questions about this
motion [2] (German), as well as the processes that lead up to it. We
reached out to all members of the city council prior to the public
hearing. Additionally, we sent a call for action [3] (German) to all our
supporters in Germany and Austria, asking them to get in contact with
politicians on this issue. The reaction was phenomenal. During the
public hearing, politicians quoted some of our question, and said that
they had never received as much input from the public before.
Thank you everyone who made this happen!
We also generated quite a bit of press coverage this way, not only in
Germany, but also in other parts of the world. An incomplete list of
press coverage can be found here [4]. Please share with us any
additional material you might know about.
== Conclusion ==
LiMux suffered from organisational problems, including lack of clear
structures and responsibilities, which the Accenture report also makes
clear. These are independent from the software used on client machines,
and switching operating systems will not solve them.
LiMux as such is still one of the best examples of how to create a
vendor-neutral administration based on Free Software. The project was
started 13 years ago when the city had to replace their no longer
supported Windows NT4 workstations. Since then, they migrated 15.000
workplaces to vendor-neutral Free Software solutions, and Open-Standard-
based file formats, supported by local IT companies. Overall this
initiative displays not only a successful move to more independence, but
also serves as role model of how to strengthen the local IT industry. By
solving the organisational problems only, Munich could continue to
successfully foster not only an independent administration but also a
strong and healthy IT landscape.
== Our goal ==
We understand that LiMux has not solved all problems, but we maintain
that the root of the problems are of organisational nature, and thus
must not be confounded with the technical choices.
Public infrastructure must stay independent of singular commercial
interests, that are known to stifle innovation. Free Software provides
the unique opportunity to invest into common assets and benefit from
everyone else's contributions, while staying in control of what gets
deployed, and when. Local service providers operating in healthy
competition boost the local economy and ensure best use of tax payers'
money.
We also note that the trend moves away from client-side operation to
more centralised infrastructures, which operating-system-independent use
across multiple devices and users' browsers of choice. It may turn out
best for LiMux to adjust its focus, while the vendor-neutral strategy
must prevail.
== The modified motion, as passed on 15 February ==
The following conclusion was reached (overruling the opposition by Die
Grünen - rosa liste, BAYERNPARTEI Stadtratsfraktion, Freiheitsrechte,
Transparenz und Bürgerbeteiligung, ÖDP, DIE LINKE, LKR und BIA):
The motion filed before the plenum by SPD and CSU shall have its section
6b (new) extended, as shown between the *** markers:
"The administration shall without delay propose a strategy how to unify
the city's client-side IT architecture by 2020-12-31, building on a yet-
to-be-developed 'Windows-Basis-Client'. Baseline functionality (word
processing, spreadsheets, presentation software, PDF reading, e-mail
client and Web browser) needs to be provided by commonly-used, standard
products, which must guarantee maximal compatibility with existing
internal and external processes, as well as other software
infrastructure (such as SAP).
*** The strategy must be clear on which applications on LiMux-Basis will
no longer be needed. The city council is to be informed on the extent
that this requires write-offs of prior investments. Furthermore, a rough
budget to illustrate the costs associated with the unification is to be
presented. The city council will then make a final decision. ***
Throughout the transition, the various departments are free to deploy
the new, unified solution building on the 'Windows-Basis-Client', or
continue using their existing, multi-tier (Window/LiMux) solution,
depending on technical status.
Strategic goal must remain that administrative tools shall be usable
independently of the client-side operating system (e.g. web apps,
virtualisation, remote desktop services)."
The original decision is only available in German and can be found here
[5], augmenting the original motion [6].
1: https://www.ris-muenchen.de/RII/RII/DOK/SITZUNGSVORLAGE/4277724.pdf
2: https://blog.schiessle.org/2017/02/14/rolle-ruckwarts-in-munchen-diese-frag…
3: https://wiki.fsfe.org/Activities/LiMux/CallForAction
4: https://wiki.fsfe.org/Activities/LiMux
5: https://www.ris-muenchen.de/RII/RII/DOK/TOP/4372059.pdf
6: https://www.ris-muenchen.de/RII/RII/DOK/SITZUNGSVORLAGE/4367152.pdf
== About the Free Software Foundation Europe ==
Free Software Foundation Europe is a charity that empowers users to
control technology. Software is deeply involved in all aspects of our
lives; and it is important that this technology empowers rather than
restricts us. Free Software gives everybody the rights to use,
understand, adapt and share software. These rights help support other
fundamental freedoms like freedom of speech, press and privacy.
The FSFE helps individuals and organisations to understand how Free
Software contributes to freedom, transparency, and self-determination.
It enhances users' rights by abolishing barriers to Free Software
adoption, encourage people to use and develop Free Software, and
provide resources to enable everyone to further promote Free Software
in Europe.
http://fsfe.org