LinuxSA Mailing list archives

  From: Richard Sharpe <sharpe@ns.aus.com>
  To  : <linuxsa@linuxsa.org.au>
  Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 00:29:39 +1030

Re: Good news maybe ?? IT Minister

Aristotle wrote:

> Richard Russell wrote:
> 
>> OK, it seems a few people are keen on a letter... 
>> here's my first draft, written on the spot, without revision, late at
>> night (how's that for a disclaimer -- if it's crap, tell me, I have
>> the excuses already prepared!)
>>
>> note also that I am not sure of the factual correctness of anything I
>> have written here -- I may be thinking of state government ... please
>> correct me and provide references if you can...
>>
>> -----------
>> Dear <Minister for IT and/or Telecommunications> [this may need to be
>> two separate letters addressing the two separate issues that we are
>> concerned about, depending on the "significantly different ministry"
>> John Howard's been touting],
>>
>> Firstly, congratulations on your winning of Government and subsequent
>> appointment as Minister for IT and/or Telecommunications.
>>
>> We are IT employees, employers, students, hobbyists, academics,
>> programmers, systems administrators and users who share a common
>> interest in Open Source and Free Software. We choose to use this


I would say that free is not relevant here. It is open source software.

>> software in preference to commercial offerings for many reasons,
>> including cost, quality and (most importantly) freedom. It frees us
>> from the confines of restrictive (and expensive) software licencing
>> agreements, and allows us to modify and improve the software we use as
>> we see fit, thereby benefiting thousands of other users, while we
>> benefit from their modifications.
>>
>> However, we are concerned about the some of the directions that the
>> Government's IT policies have taken in recent years. Three major areas


>> of concern are:


I think it is wrong to focus on Microsoft and its products. Instead, we 
should be promoting the benefits to Government and Australians of open 
standards and open source software.

I think there is nothing wrong with a Microsoft that has to compete in a 
world where open standards are king. They would not be in the monopoly 
position they are in if governments and other organizations had insisted 
on open standards long ago. The Internet is a stirling example of the 
power of open standards.

>> 1) That access to Government online services is restricted to users of
>> commercial software such as Microsoft Windows with Internet Explorer.
>> We often find that Government sites block users of other operating
>> systems or browsers, or that the sites are customised to use special
>> features of specific browsers, and are unusable unless that browser is
>> used.
>>
>> Examples of blocked sites:
>>
>> Examples of sites that don't work correctly on all (most?) browsers:
>>
>> We request that the Government adopt a policy that all online services
>> are accessible to users no matter what their choice of operating
>> system or browser. This allows more people to use Government services,
>> and it encourages competition in the software marketplace.
>>
>>
>> 2) That major Government IT contracts are often exclusive, to the
>> detriment of competition. This includes moves such as standardising on
>> Microsoft Office software throughout Government departments, with no
>> possibility for variance, even where a better solution for a specific
>> problem exists.
>>
>> Examples:
>>
>> We request that the Government adopt a policy that all contracts are
>> designed to foster competition, and encourage the best solution for
>> the problem at hand to be used, as opposed to requiring a single
>> solution for all classes of problems. Diversity should be encouraged
>> in Government IT, for the dual purposes of fostering competition and
>> developing a more resiliant infrastructure -- it is an accepted fact
>> that while uniformity can bring some cost advantages, it accentuates
>> any weaknesses to the point where a single weakness can allow one
>> virus to cause so much damage in one hit.
>>
>>
>> 3) That Government software projects themselves are usually closed
>> source. We believe that by encouraging the release of source code for
>> Government-sponsored projects, not only will the community benefit
>> from the use of this code, but the Government will benefit from the
>> community's use of this code. This applies specifically in cases where
>> the code being developed can have some wider application, but even in
>> cases where it won't, there is no disadvantage in releasing the code.
>>
>> We request that the Government adopt a policy that all new (and
>> preferably old) software projects undertaken by the Government have
>> their code released to the community under an open licence (GPL or
>> BSD). This is a situation where the collaboration between Government,
>> community, and even other Governments would result in a win-win-win
>> situation.

This is something that is worth fighting for. After all, we own it, but 
locking these things away in individual departments does no one any good.


>> Thankyou,
>>
>> Sincerely....
>>
>> ----------
>>
>> hmmm... that was longer than I meant, and may not be easily read by
>> politician types... also, I didn't touch on telecommunications issues
>> -- I think that should be separate anyway, as we could easily get far
>> broader support for that one...
>>
>> Anyway, IMHO, the above are the three main Open Source related IT
>> issues facing government... anyone care to comment?
>>
>> rr
>>
>>
> 
> 


-- 
Richard Sharpe, rsharpe@ns.aus.com, LPIC-1
www.samba.org, www.ethereal.com, SAMS Teach Yourself Samba
in 24 Hours, Special Edition, Using Samba

-- 
LinuxSA WWW: http://www.linuxsa.org.au/  IRC: #linuxsa on irc.linux.org.au
To unsubscribe from the LinuxSA list:
  mail linuxsa-request@linuxsa.org.au with "unsubscribe" as the subject