 I'm going to go to the other panel to have one at 05. So this character leads you to exactly the same space. And throughout today, we'll be using this space so that anyone can crowdsource our agenda just by posting questions and issues and whatever and liking each other's questions. So this is like our online digital space. And I'm really just filling this one out. Yes. Hi there. Thanks for coming. I'm really excited to have you guys here. If you aren't familiar with NREDI, we hope that this is going to be an opportunity to find out a little more about their work. Kind of in terms of where this is coming from, context, I involved in SIDIC Tech. Just to clarify, my involvement in SIDIC Tech doesn't represent the correct, but the entire foundation. But it does stand for what I think the essential philosophy of this really is in terms of having tech, and the piece of memory that we use in our work. And along those lines, a couple of notes in terms of ethical design. So if you're reaching out, I definitely found that it's a lot harder on SIDIC to reach new organizations that are doing some phenomenal work that should obviously also be in this space. So that's something that I wanted to note as we go in, for example, 8.10. That really is currently organized in a massive kind of internet for all. I couldn't make it today specifically because of time and resources. So I think it's wonderful to have us here. And I'd be grateful to have kind of developed people that should also be here at the same time face constraints and come into these spaces. And this is something that I was personally working on in the scope of my involvement in SIDIC Tech. It's something that I wanted to plan as we go. So for the split needs, a couple of recurring things that I've been noticing. The split needs will be made available for viewing after certain privacy information, obviously, so that we can access it. What is everybody else thinking about? What are some of the things that are on people's minds? Some of the recurring things. One is policymaking for future planning for the future and not simply reacting to the present. That was a major concern on this one. Another one was in general, what does that even possibly look like? How are we measuring success? Is it about whether we're reaching the marginalized communities, the low-income communities? Are they important to the policy process and what are they doing with it? So those are some of the most salient pieces that we've just saw. I also want to offer a little more on the... Yeah, which is not everybody's problem. So by now, everybody's probably accessed the hackbook in front, so it's not. So I hope that you use the insect from this workshop to be ready to go. And please, if you're on the workshop, you have friends that you would like to send information to, just go ahead and send them in. We'd love to know more people to find the community. And I guess that's the quick icebreaker towards the guys in the room. Who's more of us? I think... Yeah, I mean, is it okay if we speak like this and everybody can hear us? Yeah, cool. Okay, cool. So I think it was our real simple thing, three words, name, the value that's most important for you in terms of interaction with your people. And learn things about your work or your organization, your line of things. So it's three words. So, thanks, Alex. I would say that in the line of work, I fully take this from about zero movements. Nobody is the one that I kind of work with. I see I'm not like sitting here, but like, take me out. I completely defer to be incredibly engaged in the experience of all the people in this room. And it's like, for me, being like, nobody has the luxury of having the ability to collaborate is about sort of even if you are not in like an institutionally embedded place, you draw a resource in them and make the connections to help contribute to the coordination properly on the work sector. So, how about you would give the word, a third word, community-wide is coordination. That's great. Okay. So, hello everyone. My name is Pham. And I'm a server designer at Kitties. And the value that I hold is high respect, diversity, and in the Asian world where we can all take different sites and respect different perspective from different people. And yeah, I think I'll just mention my work. Okay. You're a server designer. That's great. Hello everyone. I'm Audrey Pham. And my value is, I guess, partnership for the sustainable people in Gulles, which we all wear here, right? And my work is digital minister. I'm a cabinet member in Taiwan. So, how about I just kind of take turns for one to a start, like, would you like to start? Yeah. Hi, guys. I'm Rushal. And recently landed in Durondo, like three months back. And I work for a nonprofit organization named Livelywood Cafe. It's a Livelywood project. So, we basically, we have a cafe in downtown near Kensington Market here. And we also focus in helping and settling the needs of refugees from Syria, Sudan, Somalia, and such war-torn countries. So, we try and help them settle here and also upgrade them in their skills, their job skills, so that they can do better in the future. And it's all about artificial intelligence. And so, that's what we want to look at. Look about that in the future. And with me, I have my partner here. Hi. My name is Kahal. We both work for the same organization. It's basically trying to understand the future skills after 10 years, maybe after, let's say, 10 years, the people who, because of this automation and artificial intelligence, they are going to lose their jobs. Certain number of people, certain specialized marginalized sector is going to lose their jobs. Some of the jobs will be transformed, but yeah, many of them will lose their jobs. So, we are trying to understand the future skills and product transfer skills, which can be developed and enhanced so that, you know, people down the line will not face this kind of a problem due to automation. So, that's what we are doing. So, we are trying to do some research on that with U of T students and all. So, right now, we are starting with the sample of senior refugees. But we want to expand this target to product spectrum, and we are here to try and understand what kind of civic organization which can, you know, get people to partner with us and work on these parameters. Okay, permission. Okay, thanks. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Hi, everyone. My name is Kareem Shajan. I work for the Australia Public Service, a senior communications advisor. So, from my perspective, the value I'd like to add is collaboration. A lot of my work focuses on working with teams to send out the right incentives and the right products. I can't do that alone. So, we are a lot of ways to do that. Awesome. But you get to pick the next person, so... No, I'm sorry. Every point is part of it. I'm also a junior PO. I'm here from Clio, which is Community Legal Education Ontario. So, we provide free legal information to low income and marginalized people in Ontario. So, I guess the value that we are trying to is to be responsive to those needs which change all the time and try to figure out how to fill those gaps because, of course, people aren't able to get legal assistance. I mean, anywhere here are the numbers that they deserve. So, we try to fill those gaps with information. So, I'm here to figure out new and innovative ways to listen and respond to the needs of people that we might not normally be hearing from in our work. Awesome. Thank you. Hi, everyone. Good morning. My name is Aurora. I'm a member of PS2, working with Audrey and all of my colleagues here. I work for the Foreign Ministry too, and my interests and the values that I believe in is helping, promoting mutual understanding between Taiwan, Canada, and all other foreign countries. So, my personal interest would be how to establish a partnership and bring international perspective to try to understand what is going out, what is happening out there in the world. Thank you. Hi. I didn't catch what we were supposed to say, but my name is David. My name is David. I work for the Ontario government. I was on an internal website, but as of next week I'll be working on Ontario.ca, which is the external website. And I guess the value I bring being both on the civic tech and as well as the government fields is the value I want, the value I'm looking for. I don't know which value this is, but it's the idea that when we serve the people of Erling, when I serve people of Ontario and Toronto, it's to make sure that what we're creating will actually help people and will end up causing more costs than it should. Like first no harm. Okay, cool. Who's next? So I'm Mel. So I'd say the value that I'm most interested in is about access. Is it kind of creating that uniform access across the public? This guy called me. I work for both. And I think how you, what I'm interested in is how to with different partners, but also different industries so that actually a rich engagement with the public makes lots of discovery. What, right? She makes sense. Okay. Cool. You didn't quite say silence, but I don't have to write it anyways. My name is Thillian Percalarici. I'm senior advisor with the Ontario Beach Program for public volunteer care. I'm also a civic tech member and I work on a project called Apple Labs, which is empowering people facing homelessness through technology. So I'm really interested in two aspects. One is how we can better engage citizens in the positive development process as well as how interested civic organizations like Civic Tech and the community can better influence and partner with governments. Cool. Hi, I'm Ryan. I lead a team of strategists, designers, policy advisors in Ontario's cabinet office, which is also a little bit of a covering. And my biggest value, I think, is just curiosity. I'd like to bring it to the everybody here. Cool. You're next. Hi, everyone. I live in a cold, so I'll try and speak loudly. I'm Michael. I'm here in two capacities. I'm primarily on government transformation and associated issues. And then my other capacity here as the chairperson of the rank ballot initiative of Toronto, which is a non-profit campaigning organization dedicated to performing elections in Toronto, so we move to a rank ballot as the very first passable system. The value that I bring today, I think it's probably my favorite part, everyone who is being governed is able to provide their views, their perspectives to inform policy. And then the policy, the results will have come from the most effective compromise of those perspectives and interests. And I think that there's a lot of things that we can learn about how we can do both of those things better. So that's why I'm here. That's great. Thank you. I work for the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office. My office is representing the Taipei Government's interest in Toronto. So what I'm here today is to make sure the ministers schedule on time for today because it's very busy. And I'm very pleased to have this opportunity to join all of you because this is a very new field for me as well. I hope I can do something from here. So my work for today is to make sure the ministers are okay for every schedule. Thank you. Hi everybody, my name is Catherine. I'm Michael's colleague. My value is to promote the partnership between Canada and Taiwan. Since I believe there are many, many shared values and shared interests between us. And the reason I'm here today is to support the minister and to the delegation. But I'm also very interested in learning more about this open guidance. This is a new field for me. I'd like to know, I need to learn how the high-tech technology can imitate public policy of communication and decision-making. And also all this workshops. Lido is not a new place for me, so very nice to meet all of you. And if you have any question or any interest about Taiwan, please talk to me. And Michael will stay through the workshop so he will be all available for you, besides the keeping the ministers there. That's great. Hi, I'm Lloyd. I'm here for attending the 10th year. I'm particularly able to fight space, which I manage, which allows us to stay together. I fight quite a lot across the city. I'm also sort of a policy expert how the policy happens in research where I'm part of my life. I'm actually the head of the tech research. I do think how the public understands technology that impacts their life. My value, I guess I'm going to be passionate about openness and accountability. And responsibility, like where responsibility lies, like where the lines are drawn between the public and the civil sector. Hi everyone, I'm Joanne and I work for the city of Toronto. I'm very mutual and I've been there for a few weeks, so I'm from all of you in your expertise. But I'm hoping the value I can add is the perspective of having worked outside of government, just between the CIO and the inside government and both in a kind of policy role and the perspective I kind of offer is having those two parties work with each other. Hi everyone, my name is Sarah. I'm with the authority of technical service. I'm here because I've worked on a couple of participatory among one participatory amongst the project, but also saw the folks from Taiwan have a long-standing interest in community development so I'm interested in that angle. So the value I really appreciate, the value is inclusivity and diversity in its true sense, so designing for the edges, we can talk a lot about that at the interior of the service. I guess the value we're an every time agency and so we're not profit, but we're also I care a lot about the multiple benefits of community action as government action and I'm hoping that the law mandate is strictly the high emissions reduction and largely where how can we communicate those actions through the lenses of health or social life. I'm kind of looking at a holistic lens. I don't agree with anyone. We can share our tissues and things today. So I work for the city of Toronto with the environment and nutrition and type of past six months just started working on the engagement on climate change and implementation of our climate action plan. In terms of what I value, what I'm also going to learn from the law today is the building a real genuine trust with the community on behalf of the government agency trying to build this a real genuine relationship so like trying to get away from some of the skepticism that people have that this is actually listening and actually wanting to work with them. Good morning everyone. I'm Loretta from Toronto Public Library. It's a pleasure to be here today to see everyone. I'm the community outreach engagement person at the library and we have a lot of different locations and we support equal and free access to information programs and services and I guess our values are all of those things including diversity inclusion and I also want to add innovative approaches to our region engagement and trying new things and we try to service our local populations. So what I'm interested in learning is how to increase support and encourage the participation in the city and I'm looking forward to it. I keep this trend going. Good morning everyone. My name is Brianna Smerk. I work for the Ontario government and the behavioral insights unit. I've been working on all crimes. How we are a public sector consultancy. On the surface we make low cost changes that improve public facing services and programs but at the core of the work we do is try to bring experimentation more into the norm of how we move to the policy and I guess very much of all of those lines, the value that I have is one of experimentation. those things very happily and responsibly, so that you can build that trust. Out of order, I'm going out of order. Okay, all right. The plot twist is there. Hello, everyone. My name is Asad Chishti. It's like a soap said, a said. Go to the ask me about the pronunciation. The question that I bring is, all the time, je vous considérez, quand s'ils avancent donc, basically, you know, different languages, not just Perle and Haskell or English or Taiwanese or what have you, but I find as someone who speaks more than one language, a lot of the words that get thrown around in these spaces don't mean much to me anymore. You know, you can't quite call them watered down, so, you know, if we talk about the meaning of words being watered down. So language is one thing, and the other thing I think about a lot is non-urban settings and non-downtown conversations, because Toronto, like a lot of other cities, ends up being its own universe, and I don't actually spend a lot of time in Toronto. And for work, I'm the inventor at a company called Chairs and Tables, which works on multimedia research projects around what does it mean to live a full life, a good life, as well as a chief librarian at a community library called the adjacent furniture. And I look forward to having these conversations with you. Hi, everyone. My name is Isabel Raleigh. I'm apparently a policy advisor at the Ontario Cabinet Office, but I joined the public service to work on community services integration. So we design and argue the services for the most disconnected from those services, and who we know in the long run in that possible system. My value system is meaningful engagement, and by that I mean involving people into it, not just extracting their experiences and ideas, but really involving them from beginning to end. And within that, I'm interested to learn from you how you navigate power, because I believe that's the most important thing that's never talked about in this type of work. A lot of times we throw around other statements around people having power, but they really don't, right? The power really starts with the first person who decides what the question is. And that question frames the boundaries of how that engagement will work out. So how do citizens and other people get involved in the process, and then how do they enter into the process and redefine the process where everyone else is? Okay. Okay, hi, I'm Yunchan, I'm from GOV0 type 1, it's June 0V, and we are a decentralized, CPTIC community in Taiwan, and I'm a participant in building a tour of that to facilitate online discussion on public issues. So what I care about a lot here is over collaboration with the community. I hope the civic participation and our engagement is now initiated by the government, so as the community and citizens, they can have the authority to make it on the agenda and work this in a way to push something forward and collaborate toward against the government, depending on the situation. I guess that's good to me. My name is Tess Maska. I am with the Toronto Centre for Active Transportation, we're the project manager for a program called Active Neighbourhoods Canada. And the value that I would grant is equity and building off of what some people have said, I really believe that the only way to build equity and outcome is to build equity and process. So my work specifically is in participatory urban planning or co-design, so it's focused on the built environment and how building equity and engagement processes can lead to a more equitable built environment outcome. And we're even on time. Exactly, yeah. People. So should I just take the mic? And I... Yes, I'm just adding a couple words. It's awesome to have... Or maybe you can use the mic anyway. And then speak up a little bit. And it's awesome to have Mr. John here just to wrap this up a little bit. It was awesome that you guys were able to stop by on your way to Ottawa. One of the most sought-after people in the digital government sitting right here at this table. And for me... It's like in the world where, you know, it's like they can't get enough... I think, Audrey, you actually have like a webinar coming up because like all the people in like April and Co. are trying to reach her. And many sources actually describe Audrey as the oddly, the uncannily accessible digital minister. That's definitely been my sort of experience interacting as well. Happy to have you here. Also getting the speech. And very excited also to hear from Keeves and General who've done phenomenal work. It's amazing to see from the civic type participants' perspective as well. There's so much there that I'm just going to... So for the next 20 minutes or so, what I will do is that I will take the values that everybody here seems to care very much about and talk candidly and frankly about my personal theory of change as digital minister for two years now in having this cabinet. In particular, I would like to invite you if you have any questions during my presentation to just enter them on Slido and or raise your hand and start, you know, shopping and have a real conversation. I know people will prefer Slido anyway, but anyone who interacts face to face takes priority over online interaction. This is the ground rule. And the theory of change by what in the Taiwanese cabinet is very simple and it concerns about how power is navigated. So I would like to ask for a show of hunt. How many people here have heard of the occupied parliament that is the Samplar Movement when in 2014 we occupied the Taiwanese parliament for 22 days? Anyone heard of it? So like half of people here. Okay, so then very quickly if you kind of set a scene I will talk a little bit about how that happened and how that leads to a different kind of policymaking. And so traditionally, as we know, many public issues are framed. Is it even working? Go down. Okay, that's right like this. You have people caring about maybe economic development, caring maybe about environments, caring about various types of things. And the government structure, so that we have a council or a ministry or whatever, as people just apply pressure to whatever part of the government that they feel is connected with that share their value. And the career public service being this kind of invisible line in between absorb all the tensions. And but this kind of work in the last century. But in this century, it doesn't work anymore for two reasons. First, we don't need a counselor or a traditional media to organize people at all. With the right hashtag, thousands of people, hundreds of thousands of people can just organize them on themselves, just fine. And the second thing is that there's just too many emergent issues and emergent issues. Nobody is pretty sure of what to do at the time. And so, in the internet society, which is a community that I grew up with, when it was 15 years old, 1996, I dropped out of the second year of junior high school because of this new invention called the Royal Web. I just told my teachers that new knowledge is being created on the Royal Web and my textbooks are all out of date. My teachers that I really want to drop out of the journey high and if they're okay with it which is why I have this much optimism about bureaucracy because I believe that if you get a license reasoning across, then people can actually switch to a different governance model and to the benefit of everyone. And so this is the kind of governance structure that I've learned as a 16 years old in the internet society. The internet itself is being governed in a way of what we call collaborative governance, meaning that people may have different values, may have different interests and so on, but through a radically open conversation, people can discover common values and deliver innovations that leaves kind of no one behind. But back in 2014 there was a interesting demonstration of the collaborative governance values and radical transparency in Taiwan. For 22 days we occupied the Taiwanese parliament and basically that was because the MPs at the time refused to deliberate substantially to cross straight service and trade agreement with Beijing. There's a constitutional reason because they think Beijing is a domestic city of Taiwan so they don't have to debate it like other trade service agreements, but that's besides the point. That point is the MPs were on strike and so people went into the parliament and did their work for them because they were on strike, right? So that's the legitimacy theory and the demonstration is not pro-testing. It is actually a demo in a kind of software demo idea. The idea based in Blipwood is that about 20 different NGOs who occupy different corners in the parliament are debated on one particular aspect like labor environment and whatever of this cross-strait service and trade agreement and a community called Go Zero provided not only communication apparatus but also the fact-based conversation that you can enter your company name or anything and it shows exactly how the CSSEA affects you. So everybody starts with the same fact-based evidence-based conversation and share their feelings to the 20 or so different NGOs. So every day in the occupant people converge a little bit on the consensus and every day on the parliament people read out which part are still unresolved and which parts are generally agreed and so over 22 days basically people converge on instead of five concrete synthetic demand which the head of parliament then agreed and so this was a successful occupant because the power the agenda set by the community is stemmed with half a million people on the street is then taken by the head of the MP as finding and so after that there was a mayoral election at the end of that year and everybody who supported the occupant is elected sometimes so surprisingly they didn't even prepare any operations speech and everybody who is against the government lost the election and so that kind of new tone of Taiwanese politics in saying that at the end of that year in 2014 the new premier basically said cross-sourcing of the government is just going to be the national direction and there's no turning back and so for the past four years or so we've been right consistently like the top or the second place say open data is a participation inclusivity, profit as a human right and things like that is a drastic change that we're already in for four years we're still pretty new at this but we would like to share the kind of power theory and power structure and so that brings to what does the GOV-0 actually mean GOV-0 is a meme it's a kind of virus of the mind it says very simply if there is any government service which in Taiwan always end in GOV.tw and so for example if you don't like how the legislative UN promotes its website if you think the national budget is too hard to use then you basically instead of just protesting on the street anyone can just build their own version of the website just by changing an O to a zero and so there's no discoverability problem you don't have to pay Google or Facebook to advertise your website because it's the same as the government website only by changing an O to a zero on the website address everybody can get in the shadow of government for free and because of this there's hundreds of projects each offering an alternative version of government's website the very first one, budget G0V-tw offers the visualization of the national budget and everybody can drill down through one particular part and have a real-time conversation with the public service involved but the best thing about GOV-0 is the creative commons zero which means abandoning real English and copyright so everybody who participates in GOV-0 basically really pushing most of their copyright so on the next procurement cycle if the government thing is a good idea then this shadow website actually gets merged and becomes the official website and so this is basically innovation without permission but then with an ultimate aim of being merged back and so the budget G0V-tw which is the first prototype gets merged last year as join the GOV-tw so all there's 13 hundreds different government projects including the KPIs, procurement spending, research whatever it's visible as a social object with one project being its own URL for people who have a real conversation with public service and last week I think the zero Italy just launched and because this is not trademark everybody is free to launch their own G0V alternative service so that brings me to how I was kind of waking with the government as the understanding minister because in 2015 at that time there was a interesting worldwide issue which causes self sharing economy but it means very different thing to very different people and Uber being one of the primary vehicles to carry that sharing economy virus of the mind so in the UberX package very simply put it says code is patch cards better than loss so we need to follow code not loss so that was kind of the payload back in 2015 so it is spread from drivers to passengers to driver to passengers and if after driving for UberX without a professional service license for a few weeks that driver found is not a very good deal after all they would already have spread to like 5 passengers and so basically we cannot really have a meaningful conversation with a meme because it is really just an idea of the mind and so at that time governments worldwide were struggling with how to actually have a real conversation or deliberation in this effort but we thought if we can get half a billion people on the street and many more on the GSSDA surely the Uber issue is a scale down version of the deliberation that the occupiers just did like half a year ago and so we went with the public service to design the V-Taiwan methodology which is entirely citizen initiated and that is based on the observation that if people have seen other sides, have listened to other sides and cared deeply about each other's welfare then people become inoculated by the public PRs and so we used the focus conversation method starting with facts sharing each other's feelings brainstorming about ideas that address the most people's feelings and ratify those ideas that are consistent and in this way basically we start with people on the street who speak a different language that people in the governmental apparatus and then delivered this kind of AI power conversation that allows people to converge on a consensus around their findings about UberX and the thing I want to highlight here is that actually the truly polarizing view is always just a street minority even though the mainstream media and the social media focus on the thing that takes people apart actually people have much more in common with their neighbors than the mainstream media would leave people to believe and with the properly designed social fabric and infrastructure that have an overview effect on their own Twitter and Facebook friends and discovered that they actually have much more in common than the mainstream media leads them to believe and then we took those consensus items and for their real time left consultation with some other stakeholders and then ratified the new taxi laws which is why Uber is now operating legally in Taiwan by taking in people's consensus items and so after that I was invited from being the minister to the actual digital minister and when I did accept a post that was in September 2016 and that goes to the power navigation theory I started a month's long Ask Me Anything website and basically no journalists can get an exclusive interview with me everybody can ask me questions but I only respond publicly and when I respond publicly people receive in their email of my assets and so point by point and gradually we crowdsourced my job description we crowdsourced my mandate we crowdsourced the compact not contract that I have with the cabinet of how I am to going to work with but not for the cabinet and so the consensus after the month's long consultation is still down to three main points it's radical transparency voluntary association and location independence and taking together those three are my theory of change by radical transparency I mean everything not just lobbyists who spoke for over a time would meet me must agree to publish by transcript or video or in this case 360 videos that we can put on VR and relive the conversation but they must agree to have the entire transcript published after 10 days and even for internal meetings that I chair I also publish everything after everybody gets a edit so that we sound professional but substantially the why of context of policy making before the policy is rolled out to people is published by essentially having everybody taking the perspective of the additional minister and see my day to day work in exactly the same order of influence and content as I see so this is like putting on a VR class and be in my position so the digital minister in Mandarin digital also means plural shui as in many that's the radical transparency part and the voluntary association part is even more interesting because I take no orders and I give no orders everybody in my office is voluntarily joining from agreed with the general secretary to pouch at most one person from each ministry and so basically everybody can volunteer to join here but no more one per ministry and so theoretically I can have 34 staff because we have exactly 34 ministries in the national government at the moment I have 22 but this brings a very different culture because I don't give orders so everybody has to ideate about the possible things that they bring and we enable this by the third pillar which is location independence location independence has two meanings the first one is that we have a one virtual workspace powered by this technology called sandstorm and sandstorm is an open source cybersecurity hardened attacked by the top notch white hackers for half a year who can say you know this is pure and it includes all the open source free software community collaboration tools which is like drawbacks like google spreadsheet and like google doc or like trello or like slap or like whatever every single one which has free software counterparts and we install those counterparts in the national government free for all the public service to use and anyone can also write their own application without caring about security because this is handled by this platform layer and so just by having this platform layer people in my office for example they volunteer to write a app that orders lunch together and things like that and plan trips together or whatever the software app needs and there's no need to have cybersecurity audits for those new apps at all because it's handled by the underlying system so every time I wake up and you know just like here in Canada and so on I just go on and see exactly where and what what people are working and the second thing of location independence is that in each ministry we now have a team of those or participation officers who are empowered to talk with any emergent issues that's raised from civil society by impetition or by any other means and so these people carry the same cross-style working ethic and the same rocket chat which is like the chat channel and share all the documents the processes and so basically they act like the additional minister but in their own ministry they don't take or give orders either but they're building very deeply a culture the values collaboration by basically saying if we can get everybody to the same table and being radically transparent there's a much higher chance of arriving into something that is of common good of everybody which are structured and now in the municipalities like the Tainan municipality they're also having a participation office in each bureau and department as well so that enables a direct correspondence between the participation office on the national level and on the municipal level and so basically previously they will depend on the political will of the mayor but now everybody can set the agenda on the domestic level and transfer to the national level and once they truly bi-directional relationship between the two teams of DO and that again is a theory of change and so the end result and I'll get back to this later questions in a minute the end result is that I can work anywhere so this is my office in Taipei it's the social innovation lab and it's co-created by hundreds of social entrepreneurs the soccer field is drawn by people with Down's syndrome who turn out to be excellent artists and every Wednesday from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. I'm physically there anyone can just talk to me like homeless people people who work on refugees and things like that they can just come and book for 14 minutes at one time or just walk in and just have a dinner or lunch with me and provided that they agree to have the transcript published after the fact after 10 days of editing and so the whole idea is that the space itself is mutable every day and it has a kitchen it has a resident chef and so we basically enable this kind of co-creation so people who want to test autonomous vehicles that are self-driving tricycles can just use the space to show what everybody how AI feels like and it's open innovation so everybody can change the code of the AI and people in your value map a lot of people care about what about non-capital and so which is why I actually tour around Taiwan every other Tuesday or so and live actually for a night or so in the most rural or indigenous places and even remote islands and so on and so here is Huadian the east of Taiwan and what I mean with the social innovators there may be the people who are even more remote I don't keep teleconference in but all the 12 ministries as I mentioned is still in the social innovation a lot they see through my eyes through two way broadcasting what the life is like for those people in those rural places or indigenous nations and if they raise any questions traditionally in the previous battle days their respective bureau would say I'll have to talk with three other ministries before getting back to you because all the social issues there are structural in nature but now because all those three ministries are in the same room and they've just shared pretty good food whatever together they're in a more relaxed social fabric to brainstorm about possible solutions so basically two weeks after each question is raised in this way meaning the facilitator they have to either respond point by point and resolve the question on spot or they will say this requires social entrepreneurship to fix and social entrepreneurs can cite this as an example to enter the sandbox system where they get to violate laws and regulations for a year and make sure that this work come on good and if it's a good idea by the society then it gets merged back into the regulatory system so this is why we call regulatory recreation and the regional innovation system again it's powered by this location and its voluntary association and ready for transparency ideas so we have seven minutes and we'll see if there's any questions from Slido but first any questions from the audience since we've saved the audience I already before we get into this one other questions sorry, how did the other ministers in Canada react to your contact yes, so because it's voluntary association I don't go to the Ministry of Defense and say tomorrow you're going to do things my way it's all like that right people bring to me issues that they think are wicked problems that they don't have other ways to solve but if they think they're just doing fine in the Ministry of Defense on whatever thing that they're working on I don't even know about it so this is basically like a policy law, an innovation law within the government, people bring to us the thing that they think are too wicked for them to solve but if they think the odd power is still working really well they don't even bring it to their attention and it's the same for participation offices choose the topics they work with voluntarily so I don't assign the PO's the thing that they work on what about feedback coming from citizens that you interact with every day is there any feedback you can hear from them that may not slide to you directly but to other parts of the government very much so, so by way of a comprehensive deeper participation platform the joint GOV TW platform of the 23 million people in Taiwan 5 million is active on that platform like a one quarter population is to do better but they have a kind of rolling feedback mechanism on that platform so anytime they think a piece of data is missing or a procedure is not fair or whatever they just point by point ask that on that platform and we have a mostly review system where all the participation offices look at the most commonly pointed out structural procedure issues and we fix them and our mostly meetings are also radically transparent is published online so basically we get suggestions from all over the places by just people reading of our discussions and pointing out the shortcomings of our methodologies so this again is by radically trusting the citizens but the system doesn't have to trust that but some of them do any other can you speak more about the the regulatory I think so yeah well there's two slides of questions so we'll be there for like two minutes for them yes the regulatory creation very simply is that you go through this one slot website sandbox.org gtw and site as an example of a common social or environmental or local development problem that you think that current regulation or law is a impediment to it and then you say I want this law of regulation to be changed to this way because I think this will benefit the society better and that's all you need to do in geek speech this is a patch or a pull request meaning that I want to take it to a different direction and in order to make something better and this has to be public like this is not in treatment or logging this has to be a social object for everybody to discuss and then a sandbox team of pro bono lawyers and designers and whatever look at your proposal who talks to you and channel you to one of those because we're a continental law system so to break the law you require a law that authorizes you to break the law to make an exception of the law right this is what continental law system does so if this concerns platform economy that you want to rent your private parking spaces but just eight hours or less a day without being charged as they park a lot then that's the national home councils platform economy if you want to experiment with AI based banking that you know assigns credit to people who have not even engaged with the banking system before by their telecom bills or whatever that you talk to the few types of box for example if you want to experiment with innovative vehicle that drives itself and that drives and flies or sales and then goes to the land or whatever but then you talk to the ministry of economy so it's not the ministry of transportation because they can only regulate what they know about but the ministry of economy for them are the same and so basically as long as you can say you know this hybrid vehicle solves every local transportation need you can apply for one year to break existing laws to have a test of your idea there of course it has to pass like security cyber security privacy by design things like that the usual regulatory guidelines and there is something that you cannot experiment like money laundering and or fund funding but otherwise everything is fair game and so in your experimentation proposal you're given one year and one cooperative municipality to try and then if it goes well and it scales up and you can try for another year another municipality or for a larger number of people but at the end of it everybody does a multistakeholder conversation and decide whether this is a good idea or not or whether part of it is a good idea or not it is a good idea then it gets merged back and the regulation gets changed after six days of public commenting it is a law change that requires the MPs they can take about two three or four years to change the law but meanwhile you essentially become a monopoly because you can continue to experiment while the MPs deliberate your idea and once MPs are done with that idea then of course you'll have competitors and your patch is then merged back into our national law structure and it's not a good idea if a society think it's really a bad idea and then we think the investors are paying the tuition for everybody because it's of innovation or the data and the reason why it's considered a good idea is public information for everybody so the next innovator will try a different angle without replicating the same mistakes already so that's the idea of the regulatory sandbox and so we're kind of out of time so I will take this line of questions really quickly so after your historic taxi consultation you said Uber was or was not legally it is legal in Taiwan you can now use the app to call taxis and rental cars but every car carries with it a professional driver with professional driver license professional driver's plate insurance and all those the same regulation that applies to taxis and the other taxi companies can also route their apps and they don't have to have a plate painted yellow because if you call them using an app you don't have to avail it based on color of the car so basically the taxi company also entered the competition using more or less the same Uber like laws and they can also do search pricing or differential pricing and things like that and is agreed by all the passengers and drivers during the VTRA consultation and so anywhere with social media platform doing presence there for outreach yes we do our own platform all the binding discussion has to happen on the government platform but we use the Facebook and Twitter and everything basically to lure people into our binding places and there's many tricks of doing that but basically you know whatever people say on Facebook doesn't count just only by coming to our consultation platform do can they actually ask the minister to respond to their question that usually is sufficient to get people to migrate from Facebook into our platforms for discussion how do I stop foreign influence from infiltrating anonymous system feedback to shake that log or push a right wing agenda we welcome for one foreign influences as long as they are constructive to the discussion but so maybe this question is really talking about troll management or troll control is an active research topic that I'm actually an expert in but I will share basic idea of space design yeah whatever you can have a air power conversation either through Polis which is the system or Slido which is the system we're now using you can only upload or at most download each other's sentiments you can find yourself among your Facebook and Twitter friends or you cannot do is you cannot hit the reply button because there is no reply button for people to post characters or whatever hominem attacks and so in this environment it is impossible to subtract it's only possible to add and we don't look at those numbers of people anyway it only measures diversity of opinions and feelings it never measures the strongness of people so if you mobilize 5,000 people vote exactly the same way it counts as nothing and so in this kind of diversity oriented consultation environment mobilization and troll control becomes ridiculously easy and so finally have you been able to measure the impacts yes so Fang Wei will talk more about the impact measurement we mostly measure how accountable each policy is how much of a context is shared before each policy is made how many meaningful engagement and creative branch but also from the corrective and parliamentary and the judicial branch they all have their own open government systems but the main metric we measure is citizen confidence or trust how much trust does the citizen have on their ability to impact the process and how much do they feel the government is trusting them and that is our main metric there is no doubt that this is the main metric and so sort of for being like 3 minutes over time but this is my opening speech thinking I'm doing slides I will spend around 10 to 15 minutes around clarification of terms for different stages and supply why do I have to start like this slide because there are so many different practices in the world that experiment in a creative way of working there are different frameworks method tools for different stages and it would be great if we can find a common language to clarify different stages so we can leverage those approaches and learn this better and we are hoping to build things people can build on so that's why I would like to invite you to co-create on this piece together to in the beginning the workshop and see like all the stages in framework that we can all understand each other so we can build things up because today and tomorrow we will focus on the process of serial network collaboration process as well as P1 process so I will briefly show you the diagram of two processes and you might look a little bit complicated but we will figure that out so just to give you a brief introduction P1 Network is a network of around 70 civil servants in the central government and the P1 Network serves to drive culture change it plays a key role in Taiwan's open government scene P1s are deeply involved in the conversation with civil society and government divisions by tracking cross-government issues which bothers stakeholders openly and creatively and P1 is an experiment that prototypes an open consultation process for the entire society to engage in the rational discussion on national issues so how can we leverage those different experiments and practices as their links so our team is working on the collaboration of the terms for different stages so if you can see the plan dots it's the stages that we define that we find it can be easily respond and understand by people from different disciplines so events so the current state is event there are so many things happening in the world and when we go to the stage of noticing because noticing stage is dependent on our allocation of attention we have different experiences and different source of information and those information will build on how we see the world and how we react on certain things so the difference between event and noticing is event you don't select you know it's just things that are happening but when we started to notice certain things then we start to change the way the starting point of how we make decisions so that's why we want to separate these two stages to clarify the difference then proposal so once we have certain allocation of attention we will start to act on certain things it can be a small proposal it can be a big proposal so once we reach the proposal stage you will turn into a general or just a setting where sometimes we select the priority of the government or the priority the civil society is going to protest or argue about then the next stage will be research preparation because once we get an idea of the issue that we want to work towards then we need to start understand more about the context around the issue so the research preparation will be followed by the general or the general setting then once we need to prepare the research stage we need to collect more data based on different issues once we collect the data we need to structure that and analyze those data so make sure we understand and be able to synthesize those information sensible then we reach to the point where framing framing is a very important part because sometimes people find there are issues they want to work towards and they find a solution really quickly but without going through the stage of research preparation the collection and the construction analysis they wouldn't be able to understand the context of the issue holistically so once we reach the previous stage then we can frame a better question that leads us towards the development part which is we will generate possible solutions based on the question that we framed then during the development stage we will be able to build test learn and iterate that through our process once we feel we are happy about that then we will go to the delivery stage where things got deployed but this is not the end of the process yet evaluation is very important and those those things can go back to any stage where you feel it is needed to so those are stages that we think is extremely important in the either service improvement or policy making process and this is the framework that we want to suggest and we would like to cooperate with you guys so that we can build certain things together so for example we can say oh during this stage this is our approaches and our experiment and this is our learning so we can easily leverage our learnings together rather than using different languages and not being able to share our knowledge efficiently so if we look this back to the top of line that will be the process of pure network and then this is the process of the Taiwan and if we put that together you will be able to see the difference and approaches that each initiative take there might be different terminologies towards different practice but in this framework it will be able to see oh this process is actually responding to your process and this is your approach and this is my approach so in this stage we can learn this from each other in sectors that cooperate this together in the following two days and if you have any questions please raise any points during the workshop so I think this is the time we are still having a few minutes towards the coffee break so is there any questions or any reflections or any thoughts find your ever under pressure to speed up those first research prep data collection structuring parts of the process because of either political timelines or just for the past experience often people talk about doing that which is so important but then when it comes down to it they are just pushed to go into idea framing and action really cringely but honestly I think when we get pressure from the legislators or from the PMEA all they want is a clear timetable of what happens when this is like nowadays actually Uber is a great example when you call it Uber car you don't actually expect it to be summoned to the next minute to your door but it's just exactly where it is which is the main selling point of Uber and now lots of Uber alternatives in Taiwan are adopting the same approach because all people care is where exactly we are in this process but before in the battle days people only know that a policy is being developed when it's being user tested that's way down there in development or even when in delivery it's done and so people aren't having no clue that public service do all those things and so when we get the pressure on time we basically just say you know these things are going to happen and you are welcome to join if you're a protestor, if you're an MP or whatever with our next co-creation meaning next Friday you join and that usually just makes them happy because they just know where we are, there's some way for them to be involved and then they know exactly like two months after this there will be a consultation that takes it to the framing process for example so once the roadmap is shown and with a pre-degree date I think people generally are okay with it but if it's blurry then of course we get insistent pressures from all over the world just wanted to clarify what would be your next? participation offices do you publish a roadmap? we do and so for e-petition based projects the very first e-petition which requires 5,000 people for the ministries to give a point by point response the very first response to those 5,000 people through email is exactly what will happen next so the roadmap is always the first communication and then it happens according to the dates of that roadmap and so if we have a pretty popular petition of 16,000 people or whatever these people then serve as kind of our ambassadors because they will share with their friends and families whenever there is a point of involvement they can just ask their people to come and join in and so that's particularly easy with e-petition based forms for other incoming sources we have other communication methodologies but always we begin with the roadmap communication when people are interacting with the government online is there a verified identity that they are using to interact yes so we choose intentionally a pseudonymous approach we have to verify through SMS a valid cell phone number and you have to verify through email a valid email account you have to have both but when you post you can choose to appear under any name so it doesn't have to be your real name and this is under we deliberated on it for like 2 years before arriving to this point because when there is power imbalance or people are revealing something they feel are would put them in danger of course they don't want to reveal their true name but on the other hand if we allow creation of 50,000 email accounts then of course it renders this whole process useless and so we converge on this particular kind of pseudonymous arrangement I'm interested in the kind of debate that happens in the framing where it really gets interesting because at this point it feels like people don't even agree on facts anymore and I love the way you framed it earlier that we have facts, that we have emotions we have to agree on a common set of facts which sounds logical but we all live in the world where we know that there are no agreement anymore on facts everything is polarized maybe this isn't as much a prominent time one as it is here but I'm just curious when someone tries to shape the framing and that's when the real debate happens how does transparency play in the government's role in making the question easier on them Yes, so we had a petition 8,000 people strong to change Taiwan's time zone to GMT plus 9 which is the same as Japan and we have another counter petition 8,000 people strong this is how I should remain the time zone of GMT plus 8 and you can't get more politically polarized than that it's 16,000 people all feeling very strongly about the time zone of Taiwan and so what we did is in effect finding processes because in the joint platform and petition platform we have a pro color and a calm color anybody can post any supporting rationale and people can only upvote and downvote they cannot reply to each other so if you see a supporting argument and you really want to refute it like that person the best shot you have is to post something on the other column and mobilize people to vote you up and it's very civil in the sense because you cannot be not civil in this framework we took it from Peter Reykjavík from SLMT and so basically after that we see the top arguments being like changing the time zone it saves energy, it attracts terrorism whatever it increases it will reduce congestion and you have a lot of proxy rationale to support the time zone change but then all the 10 ministries coordinated by Ministry of Interior actually responded by open data and evidence of exactly how much energy will be saved if we adopt daylight saving times or change one hour into the future everybody responded how it will impact tourism based on tourism calculation models and it will not let people overwork and break the labor law and so on each ministry provided real hard evidence based on the somewhat joking things that people put forward and all the petitioners who came to the collaboration meeting told us they never expected the government to take them so seriously and so people then generally agreed that yes there will be a large upfront cost and there will be a somewhat large recurring cost if we do change the time zone and then we ask given this cost involved which is hard evidence do all the sides of the people think there is a better common buy that we can shuffle those money and resources in time too and then both the pro and con people who came to the framing meeting agreed to reframe their common buy into how do we make Taiwan to be seen as more unique in the world and that is the common frame that both the pro and con can agree on so instead of saying compromise let's change half an hour into the future but we actually based on the fact and the feelings lift everybody up to a more common universal value and people then generally agree even the people who petitioned for the change see that there are countries with multiple currencies there are countries with multiple time zones it doesn't make Taiwan that unique it will maybe take 15 minutes of international news and then everybody forgets about it and so if we want to make Taiwan seen as more unique maybe we should work on open governments diplomacy we should work on many other things culture, open air ride, whatever and then because we already commit the resource so all the ministry say okay now given the resource we have we're able to deliver on this new common value and this is sent to all the 16 thousand petitioners through email and so this basically depolarizes people people thought they feel differently but they actually feel exactly the same if you look out at their evidences and feelings there's many other cases like this but I think this one is the most charged one that I can think of that's resolved by the PO network almost sometimes so there's no other questions during the coffee break we encourage you to choose a table that maximizes the number of strangers in the same table so that like maximize diversity if you are sitting next to someone that you already know very well we would encourage you to split to different tables and so that when we talk about the framing exercise and things like that it will be an authentic experience because that is how the PO network works out of five thousand petitioners if we invite five people to join it will resemble all works of life and if they for example say oh but I want to bring 50 people from our association we ask do you actually have only one single viewpoint they're like yes and we're like no you can only bring one person to the table everybody else is welcome to join the town hall and have a collective watch on the live streaming but in the multistakeholder's discussion every person bring a different perspective which is why we would like people on every table to maximize diversity and if you come from the same organization please do split up during the coffee break so the coffee break is until 11, 10 I think so enjoy the coffee and yes did anyone everyone get the link from the slider of the head folder so we put all of the materials and links the sources of this head folder so you will be able to see the information from the left hand bar which we have process notes and this this is the benchmark that I just shared so feel free to leave your comments and your suggestions and we would like to use this document to process the tools that you already have so you can expand further so if you click day one you will be able to see all of the materials from day one and day two as well if you are on a mobile phone the folder is on the upper right corner yes so if anybody is taking this apparently so all your values are captured yeah yeah yeah and welcome to edit yeah so we will take a 15 minutes break thank you