1 EUPAN: Contribution to the Helsinki 14 th September 2006 Alejandro Moya

2 EUPAN eGovernment Action Plan From eEurope to i2010 Action Plan Activities under CIP PSP EUPAN in Declaration and Action Plan Conclusions and suggestions From eEurope to i2010 Action Plan Activities under CIP PSP EUPAN in Declaration and Action Plan Conclusions and suggestions Agenda

3 From eEurope 2005 to i2010 eEurope 2005 eGovernment subgroup meetings started 2003 Ad-hoc groups 2005 Signposts document summarises conclusions Ministerial Declaration  25 th November 2005 Action Plan  25 th April 2006 Council Conclusions  8 th June 2006

4 eGovernment Action Plan 5 Priority Objectives Inclusive eGovernment Inclusive eGovernment ePartici- pation ePartici- pation Measurement Sharing Efficiency Effectiveness Efficiency Effectiveness eProcurement eIDM High Impact Services High Impact Services Key Enablers Key Enablers Other High Impact Services Other High Impact Services eDocuments, l.t. archiving eDocuments, l.t. archiving

5 i2010 eGov subgr and ad-hocs i2010 Ad-hoc groups start meeting eProcurement and eID already in January  focus Roadmaps followed by E&E  focus indicators followed by Inclusive eGov  focus set-up, objectives and GP 1 st i2010 eGovernment subgroup meeting 11 May 2006 following mandate from i2010 HLG (20 th April) Further work on Roadmaps Launch call eParticipation Preparatory Action 2 nd i2010 eGovernment subgroup meeting 13 th September following Conference and side to side EUPAN

6 Milestones Action Plan

7 Activities: eProcurement Actions The most demanding challenges in eProcurement are: Interoperable electronic signature & administrative dossier for eProcurement. Awareness of Public Administrations at all levels, political buy-in and sharing. Awareness  visibility and buy-in for the “100% and 50%” objectives, benefits and issues are well understood by all stakeholders. Policy development  consensus building, common specifications, etc. Good Practice exchange  learn from each other and share experience, common specifications, building blocks, etc. Pilots  feasibility, learn from experience, refine common specifications and building blocks for shared reuse. A cross-border pilot shall be able to address and provide solutions showcasing how to deal with eSignatures and administrative information. Other High Impact Services, …. to be addressed

8 Activities: eIDM The most demanding challenges in eIDM are: Interoperable eIDM  reaching consensus. Actions of specific nature needed for eIDM include: Policy development and support to provide strong leadership and reach consensus on issues such as common eIDM specifications, etc. Mutual cross-border recognition of eID pilot to learn from experience, refine common interoperable specifications and create building blocks for shared reuse. Authentic eDocuments, long term archiving, …. to be addressed.

9 Activities: E & E The most demanding challenges in E&E are: Impact oriented benchmarking. Sustainable sharing. The actions needed for Sharing include: Ministerial Conference eGovernment Awards Good Practice Exchange and fostering transfer. The actions needed for Measurement include: Benchmarking, benchlearning and user impact surveys. Promotion of the common framework, impact & networking. Awareness about E&E “gains” (supported by case analysis).

10 Activities: Inclusive eGov The most demanding challenges in Inclusive eGov are: Accessible eGov  Inclusive Front office (accessibility, multichannel…). Inclusive eGov services  Back office redesign for inclusive services Actions of specific nature needed for Inclusive eGovernment include: eAccessibility guide. Multiplatform strategies. Pilots  Accessible online Front office & Empowered civil servants/intermediaries for Inclusive eGov.

11 Activities: eParticipation The most demanding challenges in eParticipation are: Learning from Good Practices. Piloting eParticipation experiences. Actions of specific nature needed for Inclusive eGovernment include: Assessment of state of play in MSs. Pilots on eParticipation and democratic decision making. Linked to the development of preparatory action

12 CIP PSP The CIP PSP is expected to cover the Activities of the Action Plan. CIP PSP Committee  input

13 EUPAN vs. Declaration

14 NO CITIZEN LEFT BEHIND – INCLUSION BY DESIGN During 2006 and 2007, Member States will, through the European Public Administration Network, exchange experiences in developing policies which are inclusive by design, for example, in citizen-centric service delivery or the use of multi- channel architectures. Action Plan  Focus on multi-channel strategies, inclusive policies and good practic solutions. USING ICT TO MAKE A REALITY OF EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT The effective use of ICT can also help widen and deepen participation in democratic debate and decision-making. Share experiences in, the use of eGovernment solutions to reduce the administrative burden on businesses and citizens, in the innovative use of ICT to increase effectiveness and efficiency of public administrations and in the innovative use of ICT to increase transparency and accountability, all while fully respecting data protection legislation. Where appropriate, Member States will make use of the European Public Administration Network for such sharing of experiences. Action Plan  Linking EUPAN ’ s innovative public services to Good Practice Framework EUPAN: Sharing experiences

15 National initiavities National eGovernment Programmes Structural funds Lisbon (eGov part of national plans)

16 Conclusions Sharing experiences In particular national cases of : Inclusive eGovernment Efficiency & Effectiveness More generally  Good Practice Exchange

17 Suggestions for discussion With a focus on sharing experiences Cover at EUPAN meetings Action Plan Topics. In particular : Inclusive eGovernment Efficiency & Effectiveness Good Practice Exchange National initiatives supporting of the Action Plan Back to back meetings (at least one annually) Political support