Last Saturday, during a press conference, the Minister for Public Administration and Innovation presented the ' Operation Transparency , which is the disclosure on the websites of the concerned PA, telephone numbers and emails, resumes, and salaries statistics on sickness absence staff of the Ministry.

The deal was greeted with interest and support from the public and I have believed that it could be a turning point for our national e-government.

Instead, you look better, " the king is naked! ".

First published data are disappointing: the data are partial, such as those on sickness absence, are statistics, aggregate data for the office. So tell us nothing about the absence of the individual.

The reason? Obviously privacy!

And here there is another sad chapter of Operation. They are under the eyes of all the implications that the Internet publication of these data on the confidentiality of stakeholders. At the point the Minister has said that it has initiated a confrontation with the Guarantor of Privacy and the transaction is lawful. The Ombudsman, however, is silent, or at least on its website there is no trace of any formal involvement. And the memory runs at a recent episode: the publication of the income on the website of the Inland Revenue. In that case we recall the timely intervention of equity and the Guarantor. One wonders why, instead, in this case, the authorities seem to ignore the case.

Sure there are the problematic aspects as promptly noted the excellent Guido Scorza.

Before you put it on the profiles of the more purely legal matter, I would like someone to clarify a few things:

1) The Guarantor has been formally invested the question? In the dispute with the Inland Revenue has claimed a prior engagement and dutiful.

2) The framework enables existing giuidico publication on the website of the salaries of executives and employees? In proceedings against the Guarantor of the Inland Revenue has given distinguished between public and publishable data on the Internet;

3) If the topics can be posted in public and why the Minister said that the spread of data was approved by each manager?

4) The authorization given by the employees was preceded in details in the appropriate mode of publication?

In my opinion to start a real transparency operation Minister and Supervisor should make public the answers to these questions.
That started from the Ministry of Civil Service is an important journey and it is hoped that the example will be followed by other administrations. Why did this happen preparatory acts must be made public.