I welcome everyone, please settle down, have conversations outside, if you can, if you're sitting
on the edges of the rose, please gather in the middle so we can let more people in.
There is a queue outside, I think, welcome very much to the public procurement talk.
I forgot exactly what the title was, it was public procurement for digital sovereignty.
So we've already heard a couple, wait, who am I?
I'm Sebastian, I work with a pal, and I thank you very much for joining us today.
A pal is the European Open Source Business Association, and I thought I'd invite some
people over to have a little conversation about public procurement, public procurement
sounds very enticing, doesn't it?
But it's quite interesting.
In the previous talks, we've already heard that there is a lot of talk about raising
digital sovereignty in Europe, and we know all the international situation that has
led to that.
And actually, I've been for talks, I've been looking into the history of public funding for
digital stuff, and some of the oldest programs for digital industry funding go back
to the 1980s, I think the discussion started in the 1970s when Europe found out that suddenly
they fell behind in computers, and then they set up a joint program already between the
European, how was it called at the time economic union, economic community, is that
already?
Yeah.
So 1984 was the first of the programs that precedes Horizon Europe, for example.
So it goes back quite a long way, and we've not really managed to catch back up.
So that is also part of the discussion, and finally I think, and that's also been said,
there's a part of how we try and strengthen democratic control, if we think of compliance
of firms that want to do digital business here.
So why are we talking about public procurement?
Because very timely, the EU is just reforming the central procurement framework in Europe,
and that is why it sounds so boring.
It is a very general program, or a very general framework.
It's about the procurement of everything.
This is not a digital program.
But I think with the situation that we're in, we're in a situation where we can use public
procurement to actually strengthen those broader policy goals that we have, and that includes
in strengthening digital sovereignty.
So welcome to the panel, Emma Garyani from Dino, you've already had the pleasure of meeting
her before.
In the previous panel, then we have Julian Schauder from Tendis.
We have underraven tissue, who you've met, we have Maurice Hendricks from the Dutch Ministry
of Health, Wales, and Sport, and you've just heard the presentation from last month's
five from always two.
And with that, I'd like to ask you to please introduce yourself and your work.
And Emma, maybe you want to start.
What is the state of open source adoption in the public authorities in France?
Thank you.
So I don't repeat myself, but you know, no, there is my head on this slide.
So I'm the director of the French Ospo, and we're in charge of helping ministries across
France to open their source code to promote free and open source software use and adoption.
And I would say it's so France is quite, I mean, has a long history with open source.
We have ministries that are really very active, other that are really not.
So it's quite a heterogeneous.
What I can say is that we can see that there's a switch, given the recent, I mean, geopolitical
development, there's a switch in decision makers administrative decision makers mind,
to really understand why open source is important.
So AI has brought a lot to the understanding of why open source is important.
And actually geopolitical events also did.
So I would say it's really increasing.
We've had a tender for quite a long time, that is in terministerial, that is serving as a way
to facilitate the access of ministries to free and open source expertise around many different
technologies.
And as the new and also in the different ministries, we also have maybe a little European
specificity, which is that we can contribute to open source products and technologies
in different ways, one of them, which is really important for us is obviously procurement.
And we have tenders for that, but we also contribute directly to the code of open source
projects, and we also fund foundations.
So for instance, the metrics foundation, we also have debyan, we fund conferences.
So this is a way also for us to help the ecosystem live.
So we try to really, because we have internalized people, tech people, so we're also able
to contribute to the code base.
So it's a framework of public investment for us into open source, that takes tenders into
a con procurement into a conflict, also other ways to support.
All right, then the next question, Maurice, we've already talked a bit about this when
we meet Wednesday, I think.
What is the public funding we use to further the use objectives?
And what do you think about it?
Right, I work at the Ministry of Health, well, for sports as an open source expert.
And what we are doing now is building a new digital public infrastructure for data transfer
in healthcare, between healthcare professionals and between healthcare and citizens.
And the ministry feels that at this moment, building such an infrastructure and where we are
now, the only option is to do it open source.
We don't know if we're going to succeed with all the goals we want, but even if we succeed
slightly, then we have set a major step.
And what we've seen is that every step we take and all the things we do, we've procured
fully open source in this digital public infrastructure, the effects are more than we expected.
But Sebastian Neil did, I think, quite well, is that when I work fully in public with
my open source instruments, and one of the most memorable talks I had yet, the last
year was between the Dutch open source business alliances and the Dutch procurement experts.
And the procurement experts has all kinds of ideas, why do open source companies not compete
in our tenders?
They try so hard to be open for open source, and the open source company said, why is government
not putting so much effort in making tenders available for us?
There was a gap, and I tried to bridge that gap to put those guys in a room and talk
about it.
And the Dutch open source business alliance made some changes to move a little bit to
our us, and we made changes to move a little bit to them.
So when working in the open manner on policy and making instruments for procurement
experts, it really helps if the community, and that's what the call out had it yesterday,
if the community can help, if something doesn't work in government, consider it a buck
that the community can provide fixes for, and the last example I can give, there's a guy
on Twitter making a black list of awful government tenders.
But if there's one guy that follows all the tenders, and we have a Dutch open source
business alliance not falling all our tenders, you have the best lobbyist out there not
to make the black list, but also make the white list.
And we can see him up, and that's a shadow that we are here.
I have the gladly to women all suppose here as well.
We are here to cooperate with you guys, but please take that hand and help us make it better.
Thank you, I was just checking how much time we actually have.
I wanted to have a show of hands because I know a couple of faces here in the room, but it
would be actually interesting to know, do we have any business leaders, management level here?
Please raise your hands, okay, so who are open source developers, and does anybody work
in the public authorities who does procurement, okay, welcome.
So maybe also for any follow-up questions that could be, that could be come interesting.
And you're a check proposal, once you drive digital sovereignty and protect individual
freedoms, how can you contribute to that as a public sector?
Well, actually, I think it's always good to have plans.
Sorry, I think it's always good to have some plans in the draw.
If you're setting as right and use it in what ever context, so that's just, this was just
my proposal for capacity building, but I would like to interject a bit and we saw people
working in public procurement.
I also worked in public procurement as a supply for the public sector.
And so, with these legal changes, and this may be a dissenting view, I think the best
for the open source community to aim for is an exclusion from this legislation, because
there are certain elements where you don't have to go through the EU procurement processes,
and that's more convenient if you're in a procurement position, not to have these complicated
processes.
So if there would be an exclusion from source, that would provide a huge incentive throughout
the public sector, and everyone affected by this regulation to procure open source, because
it's simpler for you.
And also, this exclusion doesn't have to be total, by the way, in the regulation,
there are, in the existing regulation, there are already broad exclusions for communication
infrastructure, et cetera.
And it wouldn't be fantastic to have this exclusion, but maybe not a total one, maybe
just one for, as I mentioned on my slides, these co-platform services, what really matters
operating systems, video telephony solutions, and so on.
And then, additionally, have open source definitions and so on, put into this legal instrument
for all the rest, that would be helpful to build a base within this legal instrument.
Yeah.
Excellent.
Julian Chauder, you're from, here from Tendis, it's, you're a bit, are you, do you consider
yourself's colleagues between Tendis or more frenemies, partners, are very, very close,
which they're next to each other, very enough.
So, my question to you, would be, is the adoption of open source actually going quick
enough in public authorities?
You, I think, are quite successful right now with the Open Desk, as a product with public
authorities.
How's it going?
It's going marvellously, it's great.
Now, it's, of course, it's complicated.
When we consider the migration to the Open Desk, this, for many institutions, this is
a largest migration, they are going to take in the next years or have been, in the last
decade.
Because they have been slowly getting into a, well, a consortium of tools that they
were just used to.
But apart from this, I think the procurement side for what we do doesn't impact us in the
negative way too much, because the Open Desk is designed as a tool for digital sovereignty.
And right now, there is no framework that allows digital sovereignty without the forfreedance.
We don't have a competitor in that field.
If someone wants a sovereign solution, that's the tool to choose, and that's what the
tenders are going to go for.
The alternatives just can't put up with this.
But at the same time, we are at the very, very special situation.
The Zenders, it was, and the Open Desk in particular, was designed for digital sovereignty.
And we were funded by the government, we are still a government agency, and we were always
prepared to lose the product, because this is not just open source.
We use components that existed before, yes, like standing on the shoulders of giants.
But at the same time, this is complete free software.
We do not have a proprietary model behind this.
This is not, we take most of the code and build the tool on top of it, which is for many
open source, or many tools, there's a status quo, how it's built.
We go the free software way.
The software itself is, we are exchangeable, right?
Anyone else, any other company, could take our place instead.
And this is something we have been prepared for, right?
For other companies, this is a completely different game.
So this doesn't face us as much, but whenever I talk to companies, open source companies,
this is what they call a problem with investments.
They don't understand that you can invest in a software, you make it free software, you
make it available, and your competitor has it as well.
This is something we are starting to understand as a society, and how can we make this shift,
how can we ensure that the open software solutions are available, they are able to put money
upfront and not lose it just to the competitors.
Again, we are zendous, we are from the state, where we have a different situation.
If we lose the product, this is fine, right?
The problem is solved.
For others, it's a completely different game, and I think this is something we have to
address.
On the other side, when we talk about, that's a question.
I think we'll take questions at the end, I'd rather, first discuss that.
He was, he sounded eager.
Right, so this is just one part of this, and the other side, I can completely agree with
what it's been said before.
When I say digital sovereignty, and it doesn't face us as much, that open source has
made competitors in various fields, but for many solutions, this is exactly what happens.
The easier solution gets taken, or the one that has a name that is just established, and
is an open source.
This is why I completely understand the idea that it has to be forced.
Open source is not an idea, it's not just one thing that can be opted into.
You shouldn't even be able to opt out of it.
Otherwise, the procurement will always go on most likely, but have it easier to go for
the more proprietary solution.
Last month, you've lightened out a couple of issues already for the public sector.
How do you think the e-regulation could help in that regard?
Thank you for that question, because I'm in no way a procurement expert.
We're not reflecting on this.
I can come up with some answers, and then that answer creates three new problems.
To give it a shot, I think we need a mechanism, so it becomes okay to ask for the total cost
of transition, or the total cost of excess, as part of the procurement process, and the
evaluation criteria.
It actually becomes transparent.
If I choose this piece of software, it will cost me X amount to replace it in three years.
Then I think open source would win every time, hopefully.
And another city, I think it could be that we need to distribute the risk, so we don't
just push the risk downwards.
We need to collaboratively see how the risk, so maybe if the EU had a standardized set
of procurement specifications, and if you use those, then there's some form of safe
harbour, legal safe harbour, and to take it even further, those specifications could
be an open source project, where each member's state could contribute.
There's already a bit of nodding and headshaking from undery.
Oh, yeah, I see that.
Yeah, I thought maybe you wanted to react to what Russell said, because you were very engaged.
It seemed.
Yeah, I was very excited.
I think we should have the discussion.
There will be this EU reform on the procurement rules, and it's very complicated.
And a lot of parameters we should think carefully about, and keep in mind that it's not
only about open source, but there's something else I would like to interject is, in Germany,
what we got enshrined into law, in some federal states, actually, see how it's just like
touring, but also on the national level, in the online students' heads, too, online access
law, too, is like a soft preference for open source, like open source is to be preferred.
And of course, the pressure groups for open source, they're not satisfied with that.
They said, oh, it should be mandated, but at the same time, it creates an environment,
and we know it's like a slow migration process, where one moves into the right direction.
A bit like this, you know, this is fish trap, where one, the fish can also go back,
but we have the tendency to go move into the right direction, without having like this
hard, no, you have to use this, because especially in the public sector, when it comes
to migrating to a new office productivity software, it could be that your employees actually
hate the software, they don't like it, they say, why can't we use whatever one else
use, I want to use teams, I want to use Excel, this is so unproductive, and then, you
know, the next political government will complete your reverse everything, that's always
a risk, and in the end, I think what's important is that we move slowly into the right
direction strategically over 10 years, maybe, yeah, I like the idea of open source first,
or open source by default, or unless, or whatever we call it, but it just seems to me that
does it actually work, because it's, it's in the law, and it's, I don't know, there's
something in the Netherlands and various other places, and it's always the unless, we
see the same in the governance model in the association, I represent, even with members
that are, we have direct contact with, they always use the unless explanation, and that's
why I think, if we make it, instead, think of, okay, don't, let's not try to force people
using open source, let's make it transparent, what is the total cost of choosing Microsoft
Office 365, because no one knows what the total cost is, they know what it is, what the
yearly fee is, but the actual transformation, if you need to change it, no one knows what
the cost is, and we need the transparency on that.
We only have about five minutes left, I'm very sorry, do you want to quickly interject
some things to you?
Yes.
And then we asked the audience for questions because they were already some arms.
I was a small addition to the, and in the Netherlands, we also have to policy on with,
and when the software is equal, then open source get, and needs threat preference, but
what the issue with that is that is a matter of equality versus equity.
Open source works differently, has a different rule set than close source, so the ecosystem
is different, so if you don't know that the ecosystem you're procuring in, it's placed
by different rules.
You never get that equality, so open source never gets the preference, so we need to change
the way we've cured to actually get into that stage that there is equal preferences, and
that's something that I try to educate a lot in the Netherlands, that the policy is useless
if you don't grasp the underlying differences that are, that already.
It already takes me to the first question that we received online, and that's, do you
have a guide that's available from the Dutch government already?
Yes, I have a lot of open policy instruments that I'm shouting out to cooperate with, in
which I make it easy for procurement experts to actually procure open source.
Where can people easily find it?
Yes, I've posted it and joined up, I've posted it in the due group of selected group,
and if there are better places where we can cooperate on these instruments, I translate
them into English, for example, with Patrice Emmanuel, from the EU European Commission,
with Emma yesterday on these, so it would be great if we could cooperate and make open source
community development actually work for the procurement experts that do the practical jobs
that also, no Sebastian, you're, we will put the links on the description of the session.
All right, questions from the audience, I'll take women and non mails first, and you had
your question online.
Any non mails?
I'm sorry if I'm assuming.
All right.
Thank you.
My name is Thomas coming from a Swedish company called Digitalist, and I've been procuring
towards governments for 20 years, and I've been very frustrated, we've been providing open
source, but I think I'm thinking positive here, so I'm, and I like what you've talked
about last night's with, and I think incitement is the key, and we need to find incitement
for the procuring authorities and for the providers.
So my idea goes to that we need to start valuing what companies do and what we procure
in terms of money and resources, and I think one of the things you mentioned, Rasmus, is that
like how easy is it to change, or we also need to look at the providers, are they contributing
upstream that should affect the project budget basically?
So, and other things is like, is the company paying taxes back to Europe, or is it like
a tax-constructive, like Microsoft, where everything goes back to the United States, without
actually staying in the European Union?
So if you look, take these parameters and make instant, like change how we value procurements,
we will see the real value to back to the society when we procure software.
So that's my idea, my question to the panel, have you seen something like that, or do you like
the idea?
Can I, two weeks ago, I published an article in a Dutch news letter that's also been
read by many students, by parliament, about secured ownership.
So in the Netherlands, we had a situation that our digital identity infrastructure, cloud
provided was taken over by the American private equity, and what we've said in the opinion
was just looking at the company in itself, isn't enough, you also should look at those
owning the companies and the rich behind that, so that stock market companies have a lot
more rich than the Stewart-owned companies or social enterprises, and that we should take that
inconsideration for vital infrastructure companies.
This has been taken by markets and scientists into a petition and handed over to parliament.
So this is something that we're working on, but again, it's pushing the boundaries of
procurement law and it's something that the lawyers in the Netherlands find difficult
to move around, and that we, it's also, it's all European procurement law, so if we
can team up with lawyers, a nation or a European, why that would be great to make this
actually worth.
We are unfortunately on time, so I look at the mic to Emma from one last statement.
One last statement.
I wanted to, so in France, the situation went from very, when it's to procure, went
from open sources, not in the plan, to it's plan B to help us best negotiate with
the preparatory solutions, so it's always nice to have a plan B to say, oh, can you lower
a little please the price of the license and make a better deal for me to plan A prime,
which is our, well, for some reason maybe we should consider it as our plan A, so I would
say we are now in this situation for most of the ministry, which is a really great news,
and I agree with what you say, who is too, that we really, I mean, it's my job at the
Ospo to help ministries work on guidelines so that it's easier for them to procure in an
interesting manner in something, in a manner that's interesting for the open source ecosystem,
so meaning that, for instance, if you buy from a vendor or from an integrator that is open source
to make sure that this person will reinvest into the maintenance, and this is the kind of detail
that we're working on our procurement right now to make sure that not only do we buy from companies
when we buy from companies, but also let's buy from companies that really supports maintenance
and ecosystem. Thank you so much, I'm so sorry that we only had sort of time.
Thank you, everyone. If you leave in the room, please do so quietly because we