The 2018 Webstock was rumoured to potentially be the last, which is a crying shame. Firstly, it was the first I’ve attended, and secondly because I would like to see some of the speakers proven wrong.

Perhaps proven wrong isn’t the quite the right phrase. Really, I’m just hoping the decidedly grim picture painted of the current (and future) digital landscape was at least slightly exaggerated.

The event was a seamless, resounding success. Logistically flawless, a broad international audience, titans of a digital era presenting fascinating subject matter, and well supported by Wellington institutions Garage Project and Mojo; with Momentum as a key sponsor we could not have asked for more.

There was however an unmistakably cynical undertone running through almost the entirety of the programme. Even Janet Hughes’ Digital Government: Reasons to be Cheerfulpiece was akin to being chipper that you wouldn’t need to heat your house as it’s engulfed by flames. The less said about Zeynep Tufekci’s frankly terrifying foray into AI and privacy the better. Both speakers are experts in their field, told it like it is, and alarmingly are both absolutely right.

Thankfully, I did see a glimmer of hope for us. By us I am referring to New Zealanders, and to be more specific, Wellingtonians. Hayley Van Dyck, the co-founder of the United States Digital Service, a “start-up” inside the White House, had some fascinating experiences and insights in the US Digital Service:

1. Hayley faced a genuine moral dilemma as to whether or not to continue her work under Donald Trump (who can blame her) but agreed to stay the course for the benefit of the American people.

2. Don’t quote me exactly on this, but I recall a figure an annual budget of USD$94 billion spent on digital projects in the US government, 90% of which do not deliver. Hayley’s team have gone a long way to correcting these statistics.

3. They absorbed the entirety of the project risk in the early stages. They would offer their service to Government departments and said ‘if it succeeds you can take the credit. If it fails, you can blame us’.

4. They attracted the top tech talent in the USA to work for a Government department.

I’m getting to the hope part.

Why could New Zealand not attempt something similar? We already have a Digital Government Partnership that oversees activity at a governance level; extending this to include a practical delivery arm materially aligned to a strategic direction would seem a logical next step.

Our chances of success would be greater for obvious reasons, notwithstanding Aotearoa having the population of Louisiana with no Federal/State Government distinctions:

1. If National returned to power at a future election, some employees may well feel aggrieved, but would not lose too much sleep mulling over the decision to continue.
2. The scope of deliverables would be significantly smaller as would the associated financial commitment.
3. See above, exponentially reduced risk.
4. Hmmm.
   

Which leaves us at the only real sticking point.

As someone intimately involved in Government recruitment processes, can I see a version of New Zealand where a Government entity is given carte blanche authority to engage and hire whoever they like, whenever they like, without the burden of formal banding structures, rigid internal HR and procurement processes?

Not right now. That being said, Donald Trump is the most powerful person on the planet, and if he can see the value in a empowering a leader for digital transformation within Government it’s hardly inconceivable that our leaders could too.