Interoperability - Cabinet paper

Cabinet paper

The following paper was presented to the Chair of the Cabinet Committee on Government Expenditure and Administration (EXG) by the Minister of State Services on 11 June 2002. Cabinet confirmed the recommendations of the Committee on 13 June 2002.

Download PDF to print this paper [125 KB].

Office of the Minister of State Services

Chair

Cabinet Committee On Government Expenditure and Administration

New Zealand E-government Interoperability Framework (NZ e-GIF)

Proposal

1 In this paper I propose that the New Zealand e-Government Interoperability Framework ('the e-GIF') be endorsed as the Government's policy on how public sector organisations should achieve electronic "interoperability" (i.e. the ability to share information and technology through using common policies and standards). I also make recommendations concerning governance of the e-GIF, and the basis on which it should be adopted by the various parts of the public sector.

Executive Summary

2 The lack of a standardised way for government agencies to connect their data resources, information technology and business processes together stands in the way of increased integration of service delivery. This in turn limits the efficiency and effectiveness of the public sector.

3 This matter is a critical component of the E-government Strategy, which specifies development of a framework of policies and standards for achieving the capability for agencies to electronically 'interoperate' on a consistent basis. Without this capability, both e-government and Review of the Centre goals will be very difficult to achieve.

4 This capability will be achieved through the e-GIF, which has been developed with significant input from government agencies and information technology vendors. Use of the framework will in no way compromise the privacy of personal information held by government. Ministers are asked to endorse the framework, and agree to recommendations regarding its governance, and adoption by the public sector.

Background

5 Public sector 'fragmentation' is a major concern of the Government. Fragmentation stands in the way of improved quality of service, especially through integrated service delivery. It also limits the efficiency and effectiveness of use of public resources

6 Our e-government strategy is one way we can overcome these problems. An important part of the strategy is the creation of 'common foundations' underpinning the future development and delivery of e-government. On 10 December 2001, Cabinet agreed to the implementation of the first of these e-government foundations - the New Zealand Government Locator Service (NZGLS) Metadata Standard [CAB (01) 38/2B refers].

7 The NZGLS brings order to the way government information and services are described and catalogued. The e-GIF will deliver similar benefits. It gives government agencies a coherent set of policies and standards to use when sharing or integrating their data and information, supporting information systems, or business processes.

8 These requirements may exist in support of: delivering integrated services (both on and offline); achieving efficiency and effectiveness gains through better use of data, information or technology (especially across agency boundaries); or generally increasing organisational capability or performance.

9 Today, achieving these goals using information and technology often involves unnecessary costs. Agencies have to make case-by-case investment in negotiating the technical and business protocols required to connect together disparate information systems, stores of data and information, and business processes. This creates an unnecessary barrier to proceeding down the path of integration. If not addressed, this barrier will be a major inhibitor of achieving our e-government and Review of the Centre goals.

Comment

What is interoperability?

10 The first revision of the New Zealand e-government strategy, which I released on 21 December 2001, defines interoperability as:

The ability of government organisations to share information and integrate information and business processes by agreeing to use common standards.

11 This ability, which the e-GIF facilitates, underpins several e-government objectives. In particular, use of the e-GIF will enhance the capability of agencies to integrate information, technology and services across their boundaries, and to provide easy electronic access to government information and services.

What is the NZ e-GIF?

12 The e-GIF is a set of policies, technical standards and guidelines covering ways to achieve interoperability of public sector data and information resources, information and communications technology (ICT), and electronic business processes. It creates the ability for any agency to join its information, ICT or processes with those of any other using a predetermined framework based on 'open' (i.e. non-proprietary) international standards.

13 The e-GIF will perform the same function in e-government as the Road Code does on the highways. Driving would be excessively costly and risky if there were a need to agree on road rules each time one vehicle encountered another. Today, connecting one government information resource or system to another suffers from this type of problem. This contributes to the fact that integration occurs less often than desirable from the perspective of our e-government strategy.

14 So far, the e-GIF covers four areas of e-government activity where the ability of agencies to interoperate is essential. These are:

• Interconnection (of information systems);
• Information Sharing and Exchange;
• Access (to information and systems); and
• Service delivery (inter-agency business protocols).

15 The e-GIF will continue to evolve in line with the changing business requirements it supports, and development of the open international standards environment it reflects.

How has the e-GIF been developed?

16 The design of the e-GIF is based upon the United Kingdom's equivalent instrument (the UK e-GIF). The E-government Unit (EGU) of the State Services Commission has worked with a wide range of agencies and a number of major ICT vendors to develop a version of the UK e-GIF suited to New Zealand requirements. This has then been peer reviewed by the EGU's counterparts in both the UK and Canadian Governments, and agencies directly affected by the e-GIF.

17 Recognising the globalised nature of the ICT environment, the e-GIF is based on open international standards wherever possible. There are two main exceptions. First, the New Zealand Government Web Guidelines are stipulated for the design of government websites to ensure equity of access. Second, in the areas of Interconnectivity and Information Sharing and Exchange, the suite of Secure Electronic Environment (S.E.E.) policies and standards are stipulated.

18 The version of the e-GIF that I am recommending that Ministers endorse (attached as Annex 1) is now considered ready for implementation. Once implemented it will be kept under constant review and development.

How important is the e-GIF?

19 The e-GIF is one of the foundations of our e-government strategy. Achieving the goals of our strategy depends on the e-GIF being endorsed by Cabinet and proactively adopted by agencies. If this does not happen two options remain. They are either to:

• settle for a less integrated, efficient and effective set of e-government outcomes; or
• undertake massive physical integration of data, ICT or business processes; at very high levels of cost and risk, and reduced levels of flexibility in designing the machinery of government in the future.

20 Ultimately, use of the e-GIF supports improvement of the customer experience of government, and gains in the effectiveness and efficiency of government organisations. Without implementation of the e-GIF, a fundamental barrier to delivery of integrated government information and services (either on or offline), and achievement of other e-government and Review of the Centre goals will continue to exist.

Implementation

21 Interoperability is not an end in itself. It is only useful where benefits arise from agencies sharing or integrating information, technology or business processes across their boundaries. Bearing this in mind, there are two dimensions to the success of the e-GIF in supporting our e-government and Review of the Centre goals. These are:

• the extent of uptake of the e-GIF by agencies; and
• the quality of the e-GIF as a common management framework for government.

22 The first dimension will be affected by Cabinet decisions on implementation of the e-GIF, and how agencies respond. The second dimension will be affected by the degree of proactive uptake and support for the e-GIF from agencies. Both the first and the second dimensions also depend on the governance and management arrangements that are set up around the e-GIF.

Which agencies should adopt the e-GIF?

23 The degree of benefit that the e-GIF will deliver depends upon maximising its uptake. I therefore propose that adoption of the e-GIF be made a mandatory requirement of the Public Service, and of the non-State Sector Act departments (i.e. the New Zealand Police, the New Zealand Defence Force, the Parliamentary Counsel Office, the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service, and the Government Communications Security Bureau). This requirement should also extend to the Office of the Clerk and the Parliamentary Service.

24 In line with public sector governance arrangements, the wider State sector should be encouraged to adopt the e-GIF, and local government should be invited to use it.

On what basis should it be adopted?

25 Implementation of the e-GIF should not result in it becoming a blunt instrument. As with other aspects of the e-government strategy, adoption of the e-GIF should happen in support of agencies' plans to participate in e-government. Ministers should expect to see this being integrated into strategic plans, Statements of Intent, and other key planning and accountability documents from this point forward.

26 It is not necessary that every government information system or software application be interoperable either today or in the future. Also, it is not essential that those things that should be interoperable become so immediately.

27 In some cases interoperability will need to be achieved by means other than those currently codified in the e-GIF (e.g. the use of EDI in the international Customs environment, or the need for function-specific standards such as are required in the health sector). In other instances, agencies will find reason to use technologies that the e-GIF cannot currently accommodate, due to lack of relevant international standards (e.g. use of Voice over Internet Protocol [VoIP] based communications infrastructure in the Social Sector). As the open standards environment catches up with these technologies, they will be included in the e-GIF.

28 For those agencies that are directed to adopt the e-GIF, I propose that:

• Current information systems, software applications, or electronic data/information resources do not need to comply with the e-GIF immediately.
• Any new information system, software application, or electronic data/information resource (or current instances of these being redeveloped or replaced); or systems for interfacing with the same; must comply with the e-GIF except in instances where:
  • it is certain that interoperability will never be a requirement; or
  • the current version of the e-GIF does not, and could not, include policies, standards or guidelines concerning the technologies the agency needs (not wants) to employ; or
  • an alternative approach to achieving interoperability (e.g. EDI) is justified.

• Where an agency believes there are grounds for exemption from the e-GIF, it must:
  • conclusively demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the e-GIF Steward (see paragraph 36) where the current version of the e-GIF cannot meet requirements, or why an alternative approach to achieving interoperability is justified; and
  • where sensible, contribute to the updating of the e-GIF.
• Where an exemption is approved it will only apply to a specific information system, software application, electronic data/information resource or business process; not the entirety of an agency's information and technology environment and/or business processes.
• Specialist systems employed or sponsored by the security and intelligence agencies are automatically exempted where compliance with the e-GIF is inappropriate.

29 I also propose that these provisions should not have retrospective application to relevant initiatives that have reached the 'request for proposals' stage as at 1 July 2002.

30 This approach places no requirement on agencies to become e-GIF compliant automatically. Alignment with the e-GIF will occur as part of the normal cycle of systems and software upgrading, and introduction or revision of functions and business processes.

31 The effect of this approach will be that across time, and driven by operational requirements, interoperability will become the norm in government not the exception. It will also mean that agencies will not be able to participate effectively and at minimum cost in future instances of inter-agency integration unless they align with the e-GIF.

Governance and management of the e-GIF

32 Once implemented, the e-GIF will be a 'collective asset' supporting the future capability and performance of both individual agencies, and the public sector as a whole. Governance of the e-GIF must ensure that its benefits (increased agency and public sector capability, performance, efficiency and effectiveness) outweigh its 'costs' (decreased agency level autonomy, e-GIF administration costs).

Design of governance arrangements: guiding principles

33 Design of governance arrangements for the e-GIF should reflect the following principles:

• the principles of stewardship and custodianship developed as part of the Policy Framework for Government-held Information [CAB (98) M 22/27 refers] should be reflected in the governance of the e-GIF;
• clarity of roles, responsibilities and accountabilities; and transparency of decision-making processes, is essential. A clear chain of accountability flowing from a Cabinet Minister with appropriate portfolio responsibilities is required;
• consistency of e-GIF governance with public sector legal arrangements is required;
• balancing of the collective interest of government in the e-GIF with the interests of individual agencies and their stakeholders must be a priority. Where this is not possible, the collective interest should be given the greater priority;
• e-GIF maintenance, development and implementation processes should be inclusive and as consensual as practicable; and
• agencies that are required to adopt the e-GIF must be provided with the opportunity to participate in governance of the e-GIF; and must have access to a process for raising valid concerns over decisions made by the Steward or Management Committee.

34 Governance arrangements must also:

• be supported with adequate organisational resources and capabilities;
• account for the complexity of e-government stakeholder and operating environments;
• ensure ongoing alignment of the e-GIF with the e-government strategy and the Review of the Centre (especially the work stream focussed on integrated electronic service delivery);
• build confidence in, and commitment to, the e-GIF from all its stakeholders; and
• with regard to day-to-day operation of the e-GIF, show a close fit with the responsibilities and capabilities of the organisation(s) involved.

35 These considerations also arise with other parts of the common e-government infrastructure as it is implemented. Alongside the e-GIF, there will be other collective assets such as the Portal, the Shared Workspace, the Secure Electronic Environment (S.E.E.™), and the e-procurement system requiring similar governance arrangements.

36 The EGU is developing policy advice for me on how governance of this type of public asset should be handled in the future. Pending the outcome of this work, I propose the following as interim governance arrangements for the e-GIF:

• that the State Services Commissioner be the Steward of the e-GIF, having accountability (and corresponding decision-making authority) for its ongoing development and management;
• that the State Services Commissioner convene, at his discretion, an e-GIF Management Committee to act on his behalf in overseeing the ongoing development and management of the e-GIF;
• that membership of the e-GIF Management Committee be drawn from the senior ranks of agencies adopting the e-GIF;
• that, in the first instance, the Steward will appoint the EGU as custodian of the e-GIF, with the responsibility to undertake day-to-day operation of the e-GIF under the oversight of the e-GIF Management Committee;
• that the Steward may, at his discretion, outsource the day-to-day operations of the e-GIF to any suitable public or private sector organisation(s); and
• that the EGU establish mechanisms to allow for appropriate input into the development and maintenance of the e-GIF by government agencies and other parties affected by it, including processes for appealing decisions.

Impact on organisations

Impact on the public sector

37 The e-GIF will, in theory, constrain the discretion agencies have in the choice and design of their data and information resources, software applications, and ICT. In practice it will not have this effect, because vendors are increasingly releasing products that embody the standards that the e-GIF codifies.

38 The major impacts of implementing the e-GIF will be:

• agencies' information systems and software will become more interoperable, leading to an increased ability for agencies to integrate information and services where permitted under the Privacy Act 1993;
• achievement of greater benefits from future investments in government information, technology and business processes, as more of these investments will be able to be shared by multiple agencies; and
• increased flexibility in making machinery of government decisions in the future.

Impact on the private sector

39 A number of major ICT vendors have been involved in the development of the e-GIF. This has been important for the following three reasons:

• much of government computing is outsourced to the private sector, which will therefore be affected by decisions influencing the future technology requirements of government agencies;
• vendors need to have a clear understanding of the public sector's requirements so that they can develop and promote an appropriate range of products; and
• to ensure that the e-GIF does not arbitrarily prohibit use of software and/or technology products, and thereby create negative impacts on the ICT business community.

40 This last concern is particularly important, and has been addressed through the provision for agencies to either use e-GIF compliant products or build e-GIF compliant interfaces to non-compliant products.

41 This involvement of vendors; and especially their ability to agree over the e-GIF specification, provides assurance that the e-GIF:

• is technology neutral and therefore will not adversely distort the public sector ICT market; and
• will be supported by a range of open standards-based products sufficient to ensure that agencies have adequate scope for selecting technologies that support their business requirements.

Risks

42 The major risk associated with the e-GIF is that it is not kept up-to-date with respect to the evolving world of ICT standards that it will select from and codify for use in the New Zealand public sector. A second risk is that the e-GIF evolves into an instrument that dictates a set of centrally developed requirements to agencies without accounting for the real world that they operate in. A third risk is that it could constrain innovation.

43 These risks are mitigated through the design of the governance arrangements that I propose above, which I believe allow for a satisfactory balancing of all-of-government and agency level interests in the e-GIF and, with adequate levels of resourcing and proactive support from agencies using the e-GIF, the ability to keep pace with the external environment.

44 A fourth risk is that the e-GIF could impose unnecessary transactions costs on agencies if not designed and operated efficiently. Again, this risk should be mitigated by governance arrangements that provide for a strong role in operation of the e-GIF for affected agencies.

Consultation

45 Many agencies and several IT vendors have contributed to development of the e-GIF. All agencies for which mandatory adoption of the e-GIF is recommended have been consulted in the preparation of this paper. The Information Technology Association of New Zealand has also been consulted, and has commented that the e-GIF is a major step forward which has significant potential benefits for New Zealanders, and which should not cause any unease among the IT industry or disadvantage any vendor.

Financial Implications

State Services Commission

46 Costs of operating the e-GIF (predominantly staff costs) will be met from Vote: State Services, where funding to operate the e-GIF has been provided for until June 2004. Funding for operating the e-GIF beyond this point will need to be considered as part of the 2004/05 Budget round.

Agencies

47 The e-GIF will impose direct costs on agencies required to adopt it. These costs relate to training and participating in operation and ongoing development of the e-GIF. Any other e-GIF related costs will arise in connection with business initiatives involving interoperability, where there will be compensatory benefits (quantifiable and/or non-quantifiable). In some instances these costs should be absorbed by agencies (e.g. via baselines); in others agencies incurring costs may be compensated by agencies that receive benefits from specific instances of interoperability; and in some cases costs may be explicitly funded in line with the Government's budget strategy and associated processes.

Legislative Implications

48 There are no legislative implications associated with this proposal.

Gender/Treaty of Waitangi Implications

49 There are no gender or Treaty of Waitangi implications associated with this proposal.

Privacy Implications and Human Rights

50 There are no privacy or human rights implications arising from this proposal.

Regulatory Impact and Business Compliance Cost Statement

51 A Regulatory Impact Statement is not required, as this proposal has no legislative or regulatory implications. Also, this proposal does not impose any compliance costs on business.

Publicity

52 I propose to publicise implementation of the e-GIF as a significant e-government achievement. I also propose that, in keeping with the objectives of our E-government Strategy, this paper be published on the E-government Unit website once Cabinet has made its decisions.

Implementation

53 I propose that, subject to Cabinet's agreement, decisions about the e-GIF be promulgated under the cover of a Cabinet Office Circular.

Recommendations

54 It is recommended that the Cabinet Committee:

1. agree that from 1 July 2002 onwards the New Zealand e-Government Interoperability Framework (NZ e-GIF) governs how public sector organisations are to achieve electronic interoperability of their information, technology, and business processes;

Adoption of the NZ e-GIF by the public sector

2. direct all Public Service departments, the New Zealand Police, the New Zealand Defence Force, the Parliamentary Counsel Office, the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service, and the Government Communications Security Bureau to adopt the NZ e-GIF on the following basis:

2.1. Current information systems, software applications, or electronic data/information resources do not need to immediately comply with the NZ e-GIF;

2.2. Any new information system, software application, or electronic data/information resource (or current instances of these being redeveloped or replaced); or systems for interfacing with the same; must comply with the e-GIF except in instances where:

2.2.1. it is certain that interoperability will never be a requirement; or

2.2.2. the current version of the e-GIF does not, and could not, include policies, standards or guidelines concerning the technologies the agency needs (not wants) to employ; or

2.2.3. an alternative approach to achieving interoperability (e.g. EDI) is justified;

2.3. Where an agency believes there are grounds for exemption from the e-GIF, it must:

2.3.1. conclusively demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the e-GIF Steward, where the current version of the e-GIF cannot meet requirements, or why an alternative approach to achieving interoperability is justified; and

2.3.2. where sensible, contribute to the updating of the e-GIF;

2.4. Where an exemption is approved it will only apply to a specific information system, software application, data/information resource or business process; not the entirety of an agency's information and technology environment and/or business processes;

2.5. Specialist systems employed by, or sponsored by, the security and intelligence agencies are automatically exempted where compliance with the E-GIF is inappropriate;

3. agree that these provisions do not have retrospective application to relevant initiatives that have reached the 'request for proposals' stage as at 1 July 2002.

Interim governance of the NZ e-GIF

4. agree the following interim governance arrangements for the e-GIF:

4.1. the State Services Commissioner will be the Steward of the NZ e-GIF, having accountability (and corresponding decision-making authority) for its ongoing development and management;

4.2. the State Services Commissioner may convene, at his discretion, an NZ e-GIF Management Committee to act on his behalf in overseeing the ongoing development and management of the NZ e-GIF;

4.3. membership of the NZ e-GIF Management Committee be drawn from the senior ranks of agencies adopting the NZ e-GIF;

4.4. the Steward will appoint the EGU as custodian of the NZ e-GIF, with the responsibility to undertake day-to-day operation of the NZ e-GIF under the oversight of the NZ e-GIF Management Committee;

4.5. the Steward may, at his discretion, outsource the day-to-day operations of the NZ e-GIF to any suitable public or private sector organisation(s);

4.6. the EGU will establish mechanisms to allow for appropriate input into the development and maintenance of the e-GIF by government agencies and other parties affected by it, including processes for appealing decisions.

5. request the Speaker of the House to direct the Office of the Clerk and the Parliamentary Service to adopt the NZ e-GIF on the same basis as the Public Service;

6. agree that Responsible Ministers will, in coordination with the Minister of State Services, encourage organisations in the wider State sector to adopt the NZ e-GIF;

7. agree that the Minister of State Services will, on behalf of Cabinet, invite local authorities to adopt the NZ e-GIF;

8. note that the cost of operating the NZ e-GIF until June 2004 is covered by the appropriation for e-government activities in Vote: State Services, and that funding for operating the NZ e-GIF beyond this point will need to be considered as part of the 2004/05 Budget round;

9. note that the Minister of State Services will publicise implementation of the NZ e-GIF as a major e-government achievement;

10. agree that this paper be published on the website of the E-government Unit of the State Services Commission; and

11. direct the State Services Commission, in consultation with the Cabinet Office, to prepare and release a Cabinet Office Circular promulgating the Committee's decisions.

Hon Trevor Mallard

Minister of State Services