This post has now been corrected in light of this morning's Newsroom story. It turns out that while TKM advised leaving the OGP, the Minister rejected the idea.
https://newsroom.co.nz/2024/12/20/coalition-scraps-plan-to-leave-open-government-pact/
"The review also found 'limited evidence that OGP is effective at achieving the goals of open government, internationally or in New Zealand', with a third of all action plan commitments from members not implemented, and 80 percent of those that were failing to significantly change government practices."
#SamSachdeva, 2024
https://newsroom.co.nz/2024/12/20/coalition-scraps-plan-to-leave-open-government-pact/
So ... we should pull out of climate treaties, if the mandated measures reveal we're doing a shit job of lowering carbon emissions?
@norightturnnz
> Which suggests the job needs to be given to another, non-hostile agency at the minimum
What are the chances that it will? The NatACTs already got their PR win ('government maintains committed to OGP despite secretive advice from dodgy public servants').
Do you see any reason this think they'll take it more seriously than the last two governments? Or anything civil society groups can do to make them?
(1/?)
@norightturnnz
> But who? DPMC? Justice?
You've got a much better grasp of the internals of this than me. That you have to ask the question, points to a bigger problem. One that could be the strange attractor, lurking behind all the examples of closed government quantified by the OGP process.
That problem is ...
(2/?)
TKM, like the PSA, represent the PoV of public servants on the efficient and convenient (for them) running of public services. That's fine, we need that function.
But the public has no formal mechanism for holding the whole of the state accountable for any systemic failures. Other than elections, whose outcomes are somewhat preempted by political parties and their closed primaries.
Maybe we need something like a Public Services Commission? Which would canvas and represent the PoV of the public on the convenient (for *us*) and *effective* running of public services? It could review things like the IPCA rubber-stamping of killer cops, as well as being the institutional home for things like the Open Government Partnership.
Idiot/Savant
Strypey