§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Allen.]
10.13 pm§ Ms Margaret Moran (Luton, South)At the outset, I should make clear that I am not an information technology anorak—with the greatest respect to all those who understand the details of all things technological and digital. I secured this debate because I believe that we are on the cusp of a quiet revolution—a revolution in which electronic government can enable us to reinvent government in the way in which we provide public services and reinvigorate democracy. The opportunities of electronic government can enable more efficient delivery of services, greater transparency and access to information, and have potential to empower the citizen and transform democracy.
My passion for the potential for electronic government dates from 1994. It arose due to my concern, as the then leader of Lewisham council, about low levels of participation in local government and low voter turnout. I recognised the need to transform our services, breaking down old departmental divisions and bringing services closer to people. The need to enhance our citizens' role in decision making is also key.
In 1994, we started the democracy project—the "Lewisham Listens" experiment—using new technology to put citizens at the heart of government and enhance local democracy. The experiment included community forums, one of the first citizens' juries, a community plan, video boxes, one of the first council community websites, an award-winning European funded teledemocracy project using interactive IT, and teletalk, using video conferencing in libraries to increase access to services and receive our citizens' views on any aspect of our work.
Subsequently, GALA was developed, providing interactive television kiosks around the borough and in shopping centres, covering health, education, local environment, transport and tourism. Although I was accused by some of my colleagues of encouraging couch-potato democracy, I believe that we learned a great deal and showed that local government is on the leading edge of electronic government.
Since then, of course, electronic government has moved on, with Bristol's plans for a digital city, for example. In my constituency, the Ladman partnership involving Luton and South Bedfordshire councils, Cabletel, Luton university and Luton airport will assist economic regeneration by training and networking local and worldwide business. It also plans to provide free e-mail for all.
Until now, local government's attempts to develop electronic government have been hindered by lack of support from central Government—but no longer. The new Labour Government are promoting new government using new technology, as demonstrated by the commitment of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to ensuring that 25 per cent. of all services are electronically delivered by 2002.
The Government are already encouraging greater use of new technologies by business, such as the electronic form for the self-employed, which I saw piloted recently at NatWest in Luton. In education and training, 134 £350 million has been committed to the national grid for learning and the forthcoming university for industry, and in Luton alone, we received one of the largest grants in the country for our central library to increase access to IT. All that signals a Government who are committed to bringing information technology access and skills to all our community for the millennium and beyond.
The big picture is not just a series of IT initiatives. The Government could lead a global revolution in electronic government. While some countries are galloping ahead in electronic government, such as the Malaysian Government with Malaysia on-line, our United Kingdom information and communication technologies infrastructure is peerless, we are information-rich, and we lead our European counterparts by several leagues. The real challenge for us now is to harness the full potential of the information society to get maximum gain for all our people. The "Better Government" White Paper offers such opportunities. It could lead the way in a fundamental change in the relationship between citizen and government.
The deep sense of disillusionment with government, which prompted my democracy project in 1994, remains. Restoring faith in and reinvigorating democracy remains the most important challenge for all politicians.
Transforming public services via electronic government to provide "joined-up " government will be crucial in that democratic renewal. However, that alone is not enough, and therein lies the real challenge in which electronic government has a key role. The challenges seem to be—first, how do we re-engineer government in a way which has a bottom-up approach and which allows Government to maximise citizen participation?
Secondly, how do we ensure that information is available to citizens in a way which empowers? In the last few weeks, we have seen the development of intelligent mark-up so that citizen access could be improved. Government must have a strategy on this, and recognise, for example, that it may mean that the old methods of civil servants drafting Green and White Papers is obsolete. More important may be how information is tagged, so access, usable information and maximum use of IT infrastructure are key.
Thirdly, the Government need to use the developments in technology. IT' s development has a hard commercial edge, but the Government should be hitching a ride to advance electronic government. They can do so by providing vision and leadership and by acting as a kind parent, setting down guidelines for the industry to govern itself and using opportunities to enhance public service and democratic participation. The development of digital broadcasting is such an opportunity. Interactive television in every living room could be used for lifelong learning and citizen participation, particularly by usually excluded groups.
The opportunities are endless. It is not just about voting at Tesco or consultation by cashpoint—there is the development of e-democracy, electronic town meetings, interactive participation and priorities for local government, or using our plans for pre-legislative scrutiny to include electronic and digital consultation. The rewards are great, as we discovered in assessing the democracy project. Using new technology to involve citizens in decision-making works. The proof that it overcomes apathy and is an important new democratic tool is the 95 per cent. satisfaction rate recorded.
135 The fourth challenge to the Government—one which they are already seizing through investment in IT in schools and libraries—is access. However, the IT-rich and poor are not as obvious as some would believe. Digital broadcasting will revolutionise access, but there is evidence that, where IT access is promoted, it is young people, women and older unemployed citizens who get involved. The Lewisham democracy project showed that teletalk and teledemocracy pilots were particularly well used by people with disabilities and people with English as a second language, and that over half the teletalkers were over 50, with black and ethnic minorities over-represented.
It is no coincidence that the school most advanced in IT in my constituency—for which I performed a virtual launch of its website recently—is Dallow junior. Some 98 per cent. of the pupils are Kashmiri or Bangladeshi, who live in one of the most deprived areas in the UK, where, in some homes, an inside loo is a luxury, let alone a computer. I also welcome the initiative of schools such as Stopsley junior, which is opening its doors to the community to take part in the IT revolution.
The final challenge is to Parliament. We are in danger of becoming the IT-poor. Can we lead electronic government while this place is so far behind? I believe that it is not just for the Government but for each of us to lead in the electronic government project. For those who wish to lead by example, I would say, "Please help, not hinder." For example, I hope that we will make it easier for all Members to develop community websites. My website—the Luton democracy pages, at www.enablis.co.uk/margaret moran—is a small contribution.
My thanks go to the pupils from Surrey Street school, who won my competition to design a website poster. My website and my on-line interface between Westminster and my constituency attempt to provide links to local businesses and schools and to provide community networks. I will be holding virtual surgeries on the site soon. Watch out, Luton—I have plans for a cyber soap box in Luton town centre. Eat your heart out, John-boy. So, is the next step the virtual Member of Parliament? My answer is resoundingly no—not if we take up the challenge of the electronic and digital world.
§ The Parliamentary Secretary, Office of Public Service (Mr. Peter Kilfoyle)I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Luton, South (Ms Moran) for initiating this debate on electronic government. I readily share her enthusiasm for new technology and how it can be used to improve the quality and efficiency of public services. I must confess that, like her, I am not an expert, but nevertheless it is our function as elected representatives—certainly for those of us in government—to recognise the opportunities presented to us by developments in electronics, to increase the efficiency of our public services.
In particular, I congratulate my hon. Friend on her time as leader of Lewisham council which, as she remarked, used the teletalk project to pioneer the use of electronic kiosks, to provide information about local services. I do not think that she will mind if I say that Lewisham is 136 quite an advanced council in that context. Certainly, it has also set up a citizens panel that bears marked similarities to the people's panel that we have established. As she also pointed out, she is a keen on-line Member of Parliament. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster was one of the judges of the competition that she set up for local kids, to design a poster advertising her parliamentary website.
Developments in information technology make what we call joined-up government possible in ways not even imagined 10 years ago. As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said in his speech to the Labour party conference last October, we are planning an IT revolution with the aim that a quarter of the services that Government provide can be delivered electronically within five years. We must remember that our economic competitors are doing likewise. The United States certainly has ambitious aspirations for the delivery of electronic government.
Clearly, people want efficient and effective service that is easy to access and flexible enough to deal with their particular situation, and it is equally clear that the public sector is being left behind by advances in the range and quality of the services provided by the private sector. We recognise that the plain fact is that ordinary users of public services—services with which people come into contact almost every day—do not differentiate between the parts of Government that provide them.
It is not important that it is the local authority or Government agency, one Whitehall Department or another. What the citizen and small business want is more effective service, with greater and more user-friendly access to information and services. It is no secret that, for the vast majority of people in Britain, Government services could be that bit better. They could be that bit more modern and that bit more like the private sector services to which people have become attuned.
As a Government, we are determined to see an end to the current situation, when people on benefit have to inform up to six agencies if they move house, businesses have to cope with up to 10 different inspectors and young people have 11 bits of Government to go to for help and assistance. That is why the forthcoming "Better Government" White Paper will be about simplifying those encounters. It will be about turning government the right way up—starting with the individual, family or business that needs a service rather than with the professional, the administrator or indeed the politician who provides it.
Above all, "Better Government" will be about redesigning Government services, so that they truly focus on the citizen, and we intend to use technology to achieve that. The Government see internet and intranet services and technologies as the key to the successful delivery of user-friendly Government services to the citizen and business, particularly the small business. We are already widely using intranet technologies within Departments.
In addition, central Departments now have the potential to access the newly established Government secure intranet, which enables secure interconnections across a range of departmental IT systems. The GSI will facilitate a more coherent, customer-focused and integrated electronic service delivery to citizens and businesses, by providing security for information that is entrusted to the Government and by allowing unrestricted access to the internet where required. The service is currently being used by a number of Departments, and others are expected to join during 1998.
137 The GSI enables Departments to communicate securely by e-mail and to benefit from access to, and the ability to receive communications over, the internet. It will also support directory and other intranet services. It should enable the Government to exploit more fully their knowledge and databases, to search the internet and to communicate more effectively with key users. It will also provide a means of linking up and promoting the increasing volume of Government services that are available electronically.
The infrastructure to deliver intranets is growing rapidly in the private sector. The Government believe that full advantage should be taken of that technology to link Departments to one another and to the populace at large.
The GSI is the result of a successful partnership with a private sector contractor—a partnership that offers a model for further co-operation between the public and private sectors. For that to happen, we need to work in partnership not only with IT companies, but with local government.
We are keen to encourage closer working between central and local government. That is why my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster has been asked to chair a ministerial committee, including local government representatives, which is specifically charged with building on our respective strengths and with delivering linked services to the ordinary person.
In initiatives such as the new deal, we are mobilising partners to deliver key changes. We have also been holding a series of seminars with participants from academia and the media, as well as from the public, private and voluntary sectors. The discussions have been stimulating, and many positive ideas have been raised. Moreover, we have invited the public sector unions to come forward with ideas on how to involve front-line staff in shaping the "Better Government" programme.
There are bound to be different organisations delivering public services, but IT will provide, first, more scope for public servants to guide people across the gaps and round the systems and, secondly, the chance for the public to do that themselves. As my hon. Friend reminded the House, central Government can learn much from localised projects and local authorities in understanding what people want from public services and how best to deliver them. That is why we established direct.link to act as a forum for public sector and voluntary bodies that are engaged in projects to provide electronic services to the citizen.
There are already many such projects throughout the United Kingdom—many of them involve local authorities, which have gained valuable experience. They are not only 138 willing to share that experience, but want to learn from others' experience. Direct.link is the forum in which that can happen. It creates a link in the chain that we are forging to deliver better public services.
As the House will be aware, we have set up a series of pilot schemes to test public reaction to electronic service delivery. In December, we launched the latest of those projects—the intelligent form—which is being piloted in six locations, including my hon. Friend's constituency.
The new pilot uses clever-forms software, the internet and digital signatures. It helps someone to register as self-employed, by cutting down on the unnecessary duplication of effort and on the number of forms to be filled in. In the not too distant past, people wanting to register as self-employed had six forms to complete for three Government Departments—the intelligent form enables them to do that in one go.
The intelligent form is also a partnership. The Inland Revenue, Customs and Excise and the Contributions Agency worked not only with Microsoft and Electronic Data Systems, but with banks, in whose branches the citizen can access the service.
The intelligent form is an example of "Better Government" in action, working across public and private boundaries to focus on a particular life episode. Not only does that allow people to submit information to Government over the internet securely, quickly and accurately, but for the first time complex legal, administrative and technological obstacles have been overcome to produce the first Government-recognised electronic signature. Of course, the potential for application elsewhere is huge.
Last week, we published the interim report on our market research into public attitudes towards electronic government. Respondents were extremely positive about the possibility of electronic delivery of Government services. The message to us is clear: the public expect Government to use information technology to enhance the quality of their lives, not only to make things easier, but to open up new opportunities for them.
That is precisely what we intend to do. We are confident that our "Better Government" programme, with its emphasis on new technology, will set the pace not only in this country but overseas, as we turn our vision for the 21st century of electronic government into a reality at the service of all our people.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at twenty-five minutes to Eleven o'clock.