Using Information Technology to Provide Government Services to the Public

Translated from the Annual Report of the State Comptroller of Israel #53B

Published – April 2003

(Pages: 202-227)

The rapidly developing technology of information, including the Internet, places powerful tools in the hands of the government with which to reshape and considerably improve the services it provides to the public.  Today the technology of the Internet permits it to conduct in addition to distributing and receiving textual, vocal and visual information other activities and services such as payments and acquisition of goods.   Accordingly it enables the government to be available anyplace, anytime, providing efficient service to the public, at a lower cost than the cost of face-to-face service.  The provision of government services by way of the Internet can reduce the workload in government units that provide services, thus improving the service even for those who still need to apply in person because the unit does not have Internet or does not know how to use it, or because he needs a service which can only be given personally.

From May to December 2002, intermittently, the State Comptroller's Office examined the main activities of central government agencies that have been using information technology to provide government services to the public. The State Comptroller's Office also examined the degree to which Cabinet decisions on this issue have been implemented.  The audit was conducted in the Accountant General Department in the Ministry of Finance, the Prime Minister’s Office, the State Budget Department in the Ministry of Finance and in a number of other government units.

1. In the past decade Israeli Governments have been aware of the great developments in the use of information technology and have tried to utilize it to provide information and services to the public.  Improvement of the service to the public by means of information technology  was already mentioned in the recommendations of the Kubersky Commission, which was submitted to the Government in 1989.  The Commission declared that full use of information technology  by governmental administration would be the main way to make it more efficient and recommended taking steps to reach that end quickly by preparing an overall program.  But until 1997 no practical governmental steps had been taken to promote the issue.

2. A committee called the “Government Internet Committee” operated in 1997-1999 out of the Accountant-General’s Office.  It aimed to arrive at a mutually agreed-upon policy among government offices for the use of Information Technology and for the provision of information to government decision-makers, for defining needs and suggesting how to meet them.  The committee included representatives of various government offices, and dealt with the procedures, training, and dissemination of information by the Internet.  The work of the committee led to the implementation of projects, which formed the core of sub-systems of the e-Government project , such as the TEHILLA Project  and the Israel Government Gateway . 

3. In 1997 a special subcommittee for information technology, attached to the Economic Committee of the Knesset [Israeli parliament] (hereafter, the Information and Telecommunication Subcommittee), headed by Member of Knesset Michael Eitan, with the aid of experts from academia, industry, and the civil service, prepared a comprehensive report on Israel’s preparedness for the Information Era (hereafter, the Subcommittee Report).  The report said that implementation of the recommendations of the Kubersky Committee was still at the experimental stage and full cooperation with all the government ministries had not yet been achieved.  It also said that while a few of Israel’s public bodies were striving towards computerization and were exploiting modern information and communication infrastructures in order to better serve the public, on the whole Israel was lagging far behind other countries in this area.  The report further said that no one government unit was responsible for promoting the subject approaching the government as a single comprehensive system, there was no planning in the country for the development of computerization and communication, and the projects completed at that time did not show evidence of inter-ministerial cooperation.

4. A Cabinet decision dated September 1997 on the topic of “Israel’s Preparedness for the Information Era”, which was taken “subsequent to the report of the Knesset Committee on Telecommunications and Information” stated among other things that:

“1. The Prime Minister will name a Minister or Deputy Minister who will act to promote the State of Israel’s preparedness for the Information Era, as follows:

a) To initiate changes in legislation, in regulations, and in operating procedures and in any other area it deems appropriate, towards the goal of readying the State of Israel for the Information Era in general and to make the economy and the public sector in particular more efficient, through the use of information technology….

….

c) To act to provide administrative and other services, which are characterized by a large number of users, through information technology.   These services will be available to the public through information stations throughout the country, and by means of open communication using the Internet. 

d) Establishing a governmental information portal (“Israel Government Gateway”).

e) Defining an official government standard for Internet identification and personal security (smart card) to operate eGovernment services, and defining the operating environment.

f) To initiate programs in the area of information technology.

g) To keep track of country-wide and world-wide developments in the area of information technology and their application to Israel ….

h) To establish a public council for information and communication which will be appointed by the Prime Minister. The Cabinet shall be kept informed.

2. To appoint one of the top executives of every government ministry and unit to act as Chief Information Officer, and to coordinate Government units and activities dealing with information technology , by means of a forum of Chief Information Officers.

3. Funding will be provided by the savings generated in each ministry as a result of these activities, or as to be determined.

4. The Finance Minister and the minister to be appointed as per Clause 1 above will decide the details relevant to this decision within 30 days.”

In October 1997 the Prime Minister appointed his deputy minister, Michael Eitan, to take charge of Israeli preparedness for the Information Era as per the above Cabinet decision, in a personal capacity.  In December of that year the Cabinet decided to establish within the Prime Minister’s Office a governmental unit to prepare Israel for the Information Era (known by its Hebrew acronym – HILA).  The decision stated that HILA would act to set standards, to stimulate changes in legislation, in regulations, and in operating procedures, and to apply the Cabinet decision of September 1997.  The state audit found that no public council for information technology had been appointed in accordance with the Cabinet decision.

From the documents it appears that in the years 1997-1999 HILA, along with the Accountant General Department of the Finance Ministry and other offices, was involved in a number of initiatives in the area of eGovernment, among them: email in government offices, the nature of the government portal, and the placement of government forms and information repositories for the public’s use on the Internet.  At the same time, the Committee of Ministers for Information Affairs and Technology made several decisions, initiated by HILA, regarding the operation of Internet sites by government offices and their use of email.  

In October 1999, it was decided, with Cabinet approval, to transfer HILA to the Ministry of Science, Culture and Sport.  The State Comptroller's Office was informed that HILA ceased its activities a short while after being transferred to that ministry.  The state audit discovered that the Ministry of Science, Culture and Sport did not inform the Cabinet Secretariat or any other government body of the cessation of activity of HILA, nor was HILA’s authority to apply the September 1997 Cabinet decision delegated to any other body.

5. In a document dated September 1999 and entitled, “Initiation Paper – eGovernment 2000 Program” (hereafter - Initiation Paper) and sent to the Accountant-General by the Information Systems Unit in the Accountant-General’s Department,  it was noted that during 1997-1999 the Finance Ministry, along with a number of other government offices, including the Ministry of Science, the Government Publications Office and HILA, spearheaded governmental activity in the field of eGovernment.  With the entry into office of the new Cabinet “a lacuna developed in the management of eGovernment, due to the non-functioning of some of those involved; the Finance Ministry’s continued leadership at this time could contribute greatly to the project’s continuation.”  It further noted that the Information Systems Unit was interested in advancing the “eGovernment 2000” program, which is a direct continuation of the Unit’s activities in regard to information systems in 1999, in the Accountant-General’s Department, in the framework of the TEHILA project as well as of other eGovernment activities being conducted concurrently in the Accountant-General’s Department.  The  Initiation Paper claimed that attempts to advance eGovernment in other governmental frameworks had encountered a lack of infrastructure and trained personnel, while the Department, by virtue of its know-how and trained personnel, is better equipped to carry out the program than any other government body.

The Initiation Paper noted that in order to implement the ancillary projects planned in the framework of the eGovernment project, a Cabinet decision authorizing them is necessary.  Likewise, it would be necessary to cooperate with other offices and to set up an administrative team to track implementation. Participating in that team should be members of the Information Systems Unit of the Accountant-General’s Department, the Budget Department and the Requisitions Committee.  Furthermore, it noted that the next stage of the project would be to draw up a document characterizing a master plan which sets out the limits of the system, how it would be subdivided, and an implementation program which would include a breakdown into projects, a recommendation on the work method of each project (whether to be developed by an outside body, by government personnel, or by acquiring an off-the-shelf program) and listing what staff would be necessary.  The document estimated that the cost of personnel and programs to realize the ancillary projects would come to some 1.5 million NIS per year.

The State Audit found that the Information Systems Unit did not receive a reply in writing to its recommendations from the Accountant-General nor from any other authoritative office-holder. Nevertheless, in practice the Accountant-General’s Department began to carry out the eGovernment project.  However, it should be noted that it did so without implementing the Initiation Paper’s detailed recommendations.  For example, the Accountant-General’s Department did not submit the ancillary projects to the Cabinet for approval , did not set up an implementation follow-up team and did not prepare a system analysis and design document nor a master plan.

In December 2002, the Accountant-General’s Department wrote to the State Comptroller's Office: “in fact the project was successfully implemented and received cooperation even without Cabinet decisions, which were not taken for political reasons and because of pressures from those who feared that the project would weaken their power.  Since the project was not brought for approval en bloc a follow-up team was not set up and a master plan was not prepared.  The projects mentioned were promoted individually, each with its own set of features and its own management”.

In the opinion of the State Comptroller's Office, given the importance, scope, and complexity of the project , it would have been proper to prepare a design of the master plan, to bring the project and the manner of its implementation to the Cabinet for approval, and to appoint a follow-up team.

6. In April 2000 the cabinet decided to table the announcement of Prime Minister. Ehud Barak that he had appointed “a public professional committee for a new public administration” (hereafter – the public committee) whose task it would be to “examine the structure of the public sector and its structural and organizational foundations, its patterns of behavior, and its activities, and to suit them to the needs and the missions with which it will need to deal in the 21st century in order to give the public high quality, available and accessible service.”

The Cabinet further decided to establish a staff to implement the reform of the civil service (hereafter – the Reform Staff) and coordinate the work of the public committee.  In a position paper on the topic of eGovernment in the Israeli civil service presented by the head of the reform staff to the director-general of the Prime Minister’s Office in January 2001 it stated, among other things, that there is no single body which deals with the issue centrally, and that “the development (in part impressive in itself) is the result of initiatives at the field level ….There is no possibility that online administration would be developed only as the result of the initiative of government ministries, independent units, government corporations, municipalities, etc.  A guiding hand is required to coordinate the development of the subject.  At the same time it is important to remember that the subject cannot be promoted without an operative structure and a suitable budget.”  It was also noted in the position paper that it is up to the Government to give the issue high priority, to turn the project into a general government project and to establish a body that would promote the subject. 

Despite its importance no discussion was held on the position paper presented by the head of the Reform Staff, either in the Prime Minister’s office or in any other governmental body, and no decisions were taken in regard to any of its recommendations. 

7. In October 2001 the Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister, Mr. Silvan Shalom, issued a writ appointing a “Supreme Steering Committee for eGovernment and Improvement of Service to Citizens” (hereafter – the Steering Committee).  The Committee was made up of several directors-general of government ministries, the Accountant-General, the Civil Service Commissioner, the Administrator of the Courts, the director-general of Inbal , a government corporation, and the director of the MERKAVA  project and of the eGovernment project in the Finance Ministry.  The writ appointing the Steering Committee did not name a chairman for the committee; however, from the documents it appears that the director-general of the Prime Minister’s Office served as chairman as such. 

The writ of appointment stipulated that the Steering Committee would guide the eGovernment project in all government ministries and independent units, would determine the “mechanisms for making internal procedures in government offices more efficient by using computer tools and data bases, and would show the ministries how to provide services directly to the public, by way of the Internet”.

The writ of appointment further declared that the tasks of the Steering Committee would be as follows: