The last issue of Tracking devoted its centre pages to a Manifesto for Social Inclusion in the Information Society. It was submitted to the Committee that was preparing a report on the Information Society in Ireland. The Report was published in late April: Information Society Ireland: Strategy for Action (Available from the Department of Enterprise and Employment). We take a look here at how this strategy addresses the issues we raised; and briefly consider the government's surprisingly rapid response.
WHAT THE REPORT SAYS THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD DO:The Strategy presented in the Report proposes that the Government should support the following: 1. In the medium term, universal service could be extended beyond basic telephony, as demand rises, but in the short term it should be confined to basic telephony (meaning that no regulations will be in place to provide any other services to those that cannot afford the cost) (p53). 2. A once-off income tax break of up to £1,000 should be offered, to be spent on a computer and modem in the home. 3. All schools and libraries should be connected to the Internet (p. 74). It estimates the equipment cost at £0.5 to £1M (p74). But "free connectivity" is also proposed for schools, and a rapid increase in the pupil computer ratio. And a "Cyber School" is proposed as a Flagship Project, in which schools and libraries would be connected to ISDN (a higher speed network that can use videoconferencing) 4. Public access points to the Internet should be provided to local communities in schools libraries and public buildings (p51); 5. The government should take the lead by delivering "citizen-centred" applications and services to the public, and being more responsive and accessible using these technologies. 6. Information and awareness campaigns should be targeted at "late adopters", including the "homecarers and unemployed" (p51). 7. Under the heading of "lifelong learning", it is proposed that excluded groups should be identified, and a programme implemented to ensure their participation, including through the provision of distance learning centres. |
A number of these proposals are very welcome. Certainly, public access points to the Internet in schools , libraries and public buildings are important, although the absence of community controlled premises is striking; and having advanced services such as ISDN available in schools is welcome from an educational point of view, and may also result in some public access. The call for "citizen-centred" applications from the government would also address some of the issue we raise, such as a better Website, and would improve access to government information and documentation. And access to "lifelong learning" for excluded groups, via distance learning would be welcome, although what this might mean in practice is not clear.
Some other specific proposals are, however, disappointing. The tax-break for home computers might seem fine, but those earning income in the highest brackets will clearly benefit most, while unemployed and low income people will gain nothing at all - the gap thus widens. The decision not to propose an extension of universal service immediately is also unfortunate. Later on, it will be too late to help reduce the growing access gap. Universal access to the Internet, at affordable rates, is needed now if the Information Society is to take root quickly for everyone, and not just those that can afford it. The demand is there already: the ability to pay is the problem. (Even the EU council of Ministers has recognised this: They recently agreed that universal service is defined to include "speech, facsimile and/or data communications", and Member States "shall in particular maintain the affordability of the services...for users in rural or high cost areas, and for vulnerable groups of users such as elderly, those with disabilities, or those with special social needs". The Irish Report appear to be behind European thinking.)
It is clear also that of the main weaknesses of the Report originate at a conceptual level.
For instance, it fails to recognise the existence of a community/voluntary sector at all. In all cases where public access or disadvantage is an issue, libraries, schools and public buil dings are seen as the appropriate access vehicles. There is no recognition that civil society, in the form of the hundreds of employment and job development, development initiatives, partnership, single issue groups, etc., must develop their own capacity to use the Information Society; that Internet access should be made directly available through these; that there is a need to support networking within this sector; and that issues such as marginalisation need specific measures aimed at empowerment. The naive assumption that social inclusion can be achieved through opening access via the "official channels" illustrates somewhat dated "top-down" thinking and a failure to grasp what "inclusion" really means.
The second conceptual failure its distinct "technocratic" strain: the idea that technology will by itself solve problems, such as rural isolation, regional peripherality and lack of Government transparency and accountability. To take the last: The Report argues that public information and services will b e made more available to all simply through the introduction of the new technologies (p22). Yet it fails to grasp that transparency and accountability do not come follow simply from the introduction of new technologies - indeed it could even lead to greater restrictions. Rather, there must be a real will in government to create a more open and accountable society - these technologies can then certainly help turn this into reality at relatively low cost. The Report does not call for such political will, but instead implies it can flow from the very nature of the technologies themselves.
WHAT WE ARE SEEKING FOR AN INCLUSIVE INFORMATION SOCIETY:The Manifesto for Social Inclusion raised issue under four headings called for: 1. Low-cost or no-cost phone connections, rental and usage tariffs for community and other social centres and for libraries and schools; as well as free subscriptions to the internet; as an extension of universal service; 2. Support for the voluntary/community sector to acquire computers and modems; 3. Support for computers in schools, to access the Internet; 4. Public internet access points in libraries, with trained support; 5. Support for a community Technical Support Agency for using the internet; 6. Support for local partnerships in areas of greatest disadvantage, to develop "electronic village halls" or local computer networks; 7. Support to initiate a computer re-use programme to recycles older equipment; 8. E-mail access for all government ministers and senior officials, and appointment of online managers; 9. Directives to (and in some cases funding for) state and semi-state bodies to make available a wide range of information; and a major expansion of the Government Website; 10. Exploration of measures to enhance public transparency and accountability. |
Finally, it is starry eyed and naive about the process of liberalisation, and confuses demand for services with ability to pay. The underlying believe is that liberalisation of the telecommunications will lead to low cost service for all, at least in the long run - the problem is simply in managing the transition. Yet it is well known that liberalisation has already caused a huge rise in the cost of the local phone call, perhaps the main element in accessing the Internet; and will require more regulation, not less, into the future to ensure that the benefits can extend to all. The recommendation that universal service need not be extended at this point illustrates the limitations of thinking here.
The Government, unusually, responded within days of the publication of the report, with a more detailed statement by John Bruton on April 9th.
A central proposal of the report is the establishment of an Information Society Commission to advise the government and monitor progress. The Commission has been endorsed by the government, a Chairperson appointed and will be set up directly under the Department of the Taoiseach, to include private and public sector, relevant government departments and the social partners. The Taoiseach nominated a Chairperson to the Commission, and will soon add the other members, expected to be a small select group.
For us, an immediate aim should be to ensure that one or more representatives of the community voluntary sector, with a good understanding of what inclusion and exclusion are about, sits on this Commission, to help educate it around the need to go further, much further, if the Information Society is to be an inclusive one. However, as the Commission Chairperson appoint ed previously chaired the Committee that wrote this report (Ms Vivienne Jupp from Anderson Consulting), and given the expected small size of the Commission, there seems little hope that Bruton (either one) will take our advice.
The government has also just endorsed a series of other measures contained in the report. The main focus is on supplying schools with computers (£3m by 2001), training 10,000 teachers in Internet use and training teachers, and creating Scoilnet, to provide advice and support. Libraries are also to be connected to the Internet (although little detail is provided on what this means).
There is much to be welcomed in the report, and the Taoiseach's instant response indicates he places the Information Society issue high on the agenda - at least in terms of voter appreciation. But there is a long way to go before the Information Society may indeed become an inclusive one, and the Government promises carry us only the smallest step towards that goal.
It is also clear that our central aim must to educate those involved in the basic concepts of inclusion and empowerment, and in the possibility that people and communities will want to take control of the Information Society for their own ends - Not simply in schools to educate the young, or in libraries as individual users: but collectively, to address the issues that concern so many groups and initiatives across the country; and democratically, to deepen transparency of government and our capacity to participate in it.