Report: ICT Community Infrastructure Workshop

A summary report prepared by Andrew Garton on the ICT Community Infrastructure Workshop held at the Department of Victorian Communities, 20 August 2004.

Executive summary

Victorians can be proud of their contribution to the establishment of community information technologies in both their state and the nation. From early allocations of community radio and television broadcasting licenses, access to film and video productionresources and training, and more recently, a healthy engagement with community access to the internet.

Driven largely by the civil society sector these facilities and services, from Open Channel to VICNet, from 3CR to Channel 31 have much to contribute towards the ongoing development and improvement of ICTs to Victorian communities throughout the State. They are the potential stakeholders in what could be a broader, inclusive process towards a media literate and technology savvy public, particularly amongst the disenfranchised sectors addressed by these organisations, my own and many others.

It was with this view in mind that I attended, upon invitation, the ICT Community Infrastructure Workshop held 20 August 2004 by the Department of Victorian Communities (DVC).

The Workshop was devised to discuss the policy issues relevant to ICT infrastructure in Victoria and in particular the link between ICT infrastructure and community strengthening strategies ... an informal workshop to canvass ideas and options for next steps in Victoria.

The outcome of the Workshop was to be a single page statement. It was my understanding that this statement would assist Ministers and their staff to better understand ICTs, in particular current trends and areas of potential focus. The document would be circulated to participants upon its completion.

David Adams (DVC) presented an overview of the role of ICTs in community strengthening. Key areas of concern included the establishment and support for virtual communities, effective e-citizenship, indigenous community needs, education, employment opportunities, service delivery requirements and strengthening civil society.

Five major growth areas within the community sector were referred to and included areas of highest disadvantage, areas of highest momentum and designated remote areas of the State.

These key areas were couched within Ministerial frameworks drawing terms and references to policy documents, in particular Melbourne 2030, Communities First, People & Placeand Indicators of Community Strength in Victoria.

The DVC concluded that specific community sectors that would benefit from community building through ICTs included:

• proportion of aged populated who have never had access to ICTs;
• all indigenous groups;
• disadvantaged young people;
• refugees;
• people with disabilities.

Carlo Carli (MLA, Victoria, Parliamentary Secretary) provided the basis for a discussion on community ICT infrastructure, most of which focused on the following:

• Where broadband had yet to be accessible from;
• Net-connected workstations as an infrastructure objective;
• The Crown Jewels that is VICNET's ISP service and clients.

Before the Workshop closed Don Schauder (Professor of Information Management, Monash University), presented the draft proposal, CommunitiesVic.Net. It provided a framework towards the longevity of VICNETand a Vision for Victoria.

Mr Schauder made it clear that the draft proposal was meant to stimulate discussion and provide a framework, or model to commence work towards. However, there was little time for a frank and detailed critique of their proposal within the collective contextof the Workshop.

It was proposed that VICNET and a new organisation, CommunitiesVic.Net be located within a new facility acting as a clearing house for research from all sectors of community communications and network building.

To achieve its goals it would seek a State Government investment of $6 million per year over a five-year period. This resource would be used to establish CommunitiesVic.Net as well as the incorporation of VICNET.

The Workshop concluded with an agreement that the documented outcome would state that a number of ICT governance models are available, that no specific model, such as that proposed by Monash University, would be referred to.

At the time of writing, this paper has yet to be circulated to Workshop participants as agreed.

Concluding remarks

ICT development for the community sector is a concern of all Victorians, in particular information on how to establish their own infrastructures, where they are needed, and to sustain them.

The Workshop, despite the little time available to comment on the proposals and elaborate in depth on the agenda items, was invaluable. It presented a framework for workshops that could engage with a broader sector of community based stakeholders.

As such it is recommend that the DVC, as outlined in the documents provided pre-Workshop, commission a range of models and case studies in addition to Monash University's proposal.

In addition it would be prudent to review established models of service delivery, particularly the community technology centres in NSW, Western Australia and perhaps even those in the Asia region.

Such a process would provide the DVC with far greater range of options, building on the work of ICT researchers, the expertise of other Workshop participants and the rich field of community ICT practitioners in the State.

My colleagues and I look forward to an ongoing dialogue with the DVC in a spirit of collaboration towards what may well be a yet to be imagined future for community ICTs in Victoria.

Andrew Garton
http://toysatellite.org/agarton/