tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
33 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Warin
Hi,


What tags to use for a local representative to parliament (or any other
form of government)?


I came across one that was tagged amenity=embassy .. which is not right.

But what to use?

I have, for the moment, tagged it as office=politician... is there
something better?


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Graeme Fitzpatrick
I've done office=government with name=Michael Hart MP, Member for Burleigh, which seems to work, but office=politician would also seem OK.

Definitely not an embassy though!

Thanks

Graeme


On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 at 09:53, Warin <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,


What tags to use for a local representative to parliament (or any other
form of government)?


I came across one that was tagged amenity=embassy .. which is not right.

But what to use?

I have, for the moment, tagged it as office=politician... is there
something better?


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Warin
On 03/11/18 11:04, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
I've done office=government with name=Michael Hart MP, Member for Burleigh, which seems to work, but office=politician would also seem OK.

Not all of the elected are 'government' .. a few are 'opposition' :)

Hence my reluctance to use that value.

Oh and there are the occasional ones that desert, not usually ones elected to the government though.


Definitely not an embassy though!

Thanks

Graeme


On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 at 09:53, Warin <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,


What tags to use for a local representative to parliament (or any other
form of government)?


I came across one that was tagged amenity=embassy .. which is not right.

But what to use?

I have, for the moment, tagged it as office=politician... is there
something better?


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Allan Mustard

Hmmm.  Reaching back to my bachelor's degree in political science, Parliament is also a government body, the legislative branch of the government, so even a member of the opposition is part of "government" in its broadest sense.  I would tag it office=government, government=parliamentarian or something similar.  Executive, legislative, judicial are all "government".

On 11/3/2018 5:46 AM, Warin wrote:
On 03/11/18 11:04, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
I've done office=government with name=Michael Hart MP, Member for Burleigh, which seems to work, but office=politician would also seem OK.

Not all of the elected are 'government' .. a few are 'opposition' :)

Hence my reluctance to use that value.

Oh and there are the occasional ones that desert, not usually ones elected to the government though.


Definitely not an embassy though!

Thanks

Graeme


On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 at 09:53, Warin <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,


What tags to use for a local representative to parliament (or any other
form of government)?


I came across one that was tagged amenity=embassy .. which is not right.

But what to use?

I have, for the moment, tagged it as office=politician... is there
something better?


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging




_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Paul Allen

On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 3:29 AM Allan Mustard <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hmmm.  Reaching back to my bachelor's degree in political science, Parliament is also a government body, the legislative branch of the government, so even a member of the opposition is part of "government" in its broadest sense.  I would tag it office=government, government=parliamentarian or something similar.  Executive, legislative, judicial are all "government".

There's a can of annelids here, just waiting to be opened.

Over here in the UK, I have an MP (Member of Parliament) representing me in the UK national
government.  There's also the House of Lords (upper chamber), some members of which might
have unofficial offices outside of parliament buildings where they can be contacted, but a quick
search shows no evidence of such.  Since I live in Wales, I also have an AM (Assembly Member)
of the National Assembly of Wales.  And, for a few more months, I have an MEP (Member of the
European Parliament).  Scotland and Northern Ireland have devolved governments like Wales
(but different names for their assemblies and members) but England does not (don't get me
started on the West Lothian question).

Other member countries of the European Union will have MEPs in addition to representatives of
their own national governments and some may have (like the UK) devolved assemblies in
addition.  The US has state and federal government.  Oh, and don't forget that technically, the US
has three branches of government so we have to decide if we absorb the judiciary into this
(does our definition of government differ from that of the US Constitution).

It's going to take some careful thought, and many postings here, to come up with a scheme
with sensible terminology that works for all those situations.  It's going to make the difference
between a consulate and an embassy seem like a walk in the park.

Do we really want to open this can?  Doesn't matter, somebody will anyway.

--
Paul


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Warin
On 04/11/18 01:41, Paul Allen wrote:

On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 3:29 AM Allan Mustard <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hmmm.  Reaching back to my bachelor's degree in political science, Parliament is also a government body, the legislative branch of the government, so even a member of the opposition is part of "government" in its broadest sense.  I would tag it office=government, government=parliamentarian or something similar.  Executive, legislative, judicial are all "government".

There's a can of annelids here, just waiting to be opened.

Over here in the UK, I have an MP (Member of Parliament) representing me in the UK national
government.  There's also the House of Lords (upper chamber), some members of which might
have unofficial offices outside of parliament buildings where they can be contacted, but a quick
search shows no evidence of such.  Since I live in Wales, I also have an AM (Assembly Member)
of the National Assembly of Wales.  And, for a few more months, I have an MEP (Member of the
European Parliament).  Scotland and Northern Ireland have devolved governments like Wales
(but different names for their assemblies and members) but England does not (don't get me
started on the West Lothian question).

Other member countries of the European Union will have MEPs in addition to representatives of
their own national governments and some may have (like the UK) devolved assemblies in
addition.  The US has state and federal government.  Oh, and don't forget that technically, the US
has three branches of government so we have to decide if we absorb the judiciary into this
(does our definition of government differ from that of the US Constitution).

It's going to take some careful thought, and many postings here, to come up with a scheme
with sensible terminology that works for all those situations. 


And those examples are only the ones 'we' are aware of. I'd like some thoughts from elsewhere.


To me these are all 'politicians' or at least serve a political role when acting (I hope) on our behalf to represent 'us'.
Don't think every situation would be happy with 'parliamentarians'.

I am not going to try and distinguish between the various levels - upper and lower houses, federal, state, local, unions etc...
That could go in the description, far too many variables around the world for a single system I think.
Lets get the first level of tagging done before contemplating a more complex area?




_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Graeme Fitzpatrick

On Sun, 4 Nov 2018 at 07:05, Warin <[hidden email]> wrote:
It's going to take some careful thought, and many postings here, to come up with a scheme
with sensible terminology that works for all those situations. 
To me these are all 'politicians' or at least serve a political role when acting (I hope) on our behalf to represent 'us'.
Don't think every situation would be happy with 'parliamentarians'.

I am not going to try and distinguish between the various levels - upper and lower houses, federal, state, local, unions etc...
That could go in the description, far too many variables around the world for a single system I think.
Lets get the first level of tagging done before contemplating a more complex area?

No, I agree with you!

I would think either of the 2 basic we mentioned should fit office=government or office=politician 

Question though (more for someone in Europe) - is a "Member of the European Parliament" elected, or just appointed by their home country? Are they a "politician" as such?

Is there another overall term for elected people? (& yes, I can think of quite a few terms for them, but I don't think we should be marking any of them on the map! :-))

Thanks

Graeme

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Allan Mustard

Top-level tag IMHO would be office=government, then additional tag would be government=legislature.

The three branches of government are the executive, the legislative, and the judicial branches.


On 11/4/2018 5:08 AM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:

On Sun, 4 Nov 2018 at 07:05, Warin <[hidden email]> wrote:
It's going to take some careful thought, and many postings here, to come up with a scheme
with sensible terminology that works for all those situations. 
To me these are all 'politicians' or at least serve a political role when acting (I hope) on our behalf to represent 'us'.
Don't think every situation would be happy with 'parliamentarians'.

I am not going to try and distinguish between the various levels - upper and lower houses, federal, state, local, unions etc...
That could go in the description, far too many variables around the world for a single system I think.
Lets get the first level of tagging done before contemplating a more complex area?

No, I agree with you!

I would think either of the 2 basic we mentioned should fit office=government or office=politician 

Question though (more for someone in Europe) - is a "Member of the European Parliament" elected, or just appointed by their home country? Are they a "politician" as such?

Is there another overall term for elected people? (& yes, I can think of quite a few terms for them, but I don't think we should be marking any of them on the map! :-))

Thanks

Graeme


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Paul Allen
In reply to this post by Graeme Fitzpatrick
On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 12:10 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:
Question though (more for someone in Europe) - is a "Member of the European Parliament" elected, or just appointed by their home country? Are they a "politician" as such?

Elected.  They don't serve any useful purpose since the EU is run by unelected bureaucrats, but they're
elected.

Is there another overall term for elected people? (& yes, I can think of quite a few terms for them, but I don't think we should be marking any of them on the map! :-))

My local councillor is elected.  Is she counted in this scheme of things?  Local government is
government and getting elected is politics.  Even though it has US connotations, a general term
might be "representative."

That's why I said this is a can of annelids.  In a rabbit hole.

--
Paul


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Warin
In reply to this post by Allan Mustard
On 04/11/18 11:17, Allan Mustard wrote:

Top-level tag IMHO would be office=government, then additional tag would be government=legislature.

The three branches of government are the executive, the legislative, and the judicial branches.


Errr...

 this is not to map
the executive, the legislative, or the judicial branches! Probably why I thought office=politician would be better than office=government.

This is to map the personal usually local office of some usually elected representative .. so locals can communicate to them and they can communicate to locals (who usually elect them). It is not about the
executive, the legislative, and the judicial branches' but about a politician trying to maintain some connection to the people that usually elect them .. so they might get re-elected.

Have I put enough 'usually' in there to keep the edge cases happy?


An example?
Tony Abbott ex PM, http://tonyabbott.com.au/ Has an office at
Level 2, 17 Sydney Road, Manly, NSW 2095 Australia. It is not the office of the Liberal Party, nor an office of what ever role he might be playing in parliament. It is an office of Tony Abbott the elected representative in this area.




On 11/4/2018 5:08 AM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:

On Sun, 4 Nov 2018 at 07:05, Warin <[hidden email]> wrote:
It's going to take some careful thought, and many postings here, to come up with a scheme
with sensible terminology that works for all those situations. 
To me these are all 'politicians' or at least serve a political role when acting (I hope) on our behalf to represent 'us'.
Don't think every situation would be happy with 'parliamentarians'.

I am not going to try and distinguish between the various levels - upper and lower houses, federal, state, local, unions etc...
That could go in the description, far too many variables around the world for a single system I think.
Lets get the first level of tagging done before contemplating a more complex area?

No, I agree with you!

I would think either of the 2 basic we mentioned should fit office=government or office=politician 

Question though (more for someone in Europe) - is a "Member of the European Parliament" elected, or just appointed by their home country? Are they a "politician" as such?

Is there another overall term for elected people? (& yes, I can think of quite a few terms for them, but I don't think we should be marking any of them on the map! :-))

Thanks

Graeme



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Allan Mustard

He is still a government official, is drawing a government salary, and the office rent is paid for out of the government budget.  It isn't his personal office for which he is paying out of his own pocket. 

Political parties don't pay for office expenses of members of Parliament or other legislatures.  "Politician" would be more appropriate for the campaign office of candidate who has not yet been elected, but they are temporary and thus not mappable under OSM guidelines.


On 11/4/2018 6:33 AM, Warin wrote:
On 04/11/18 11:17, Allan Mustard wrote:

Top-level tag IMHO would be office=government, then additional tag would be government=legislature.

The three branches of government are the executive, the legislative, and the judicial branches.


Errr...

 this is not to map
the executive, the legislative, or the judicial branches! Probably why I thought office=politician would be better than office=government.

This is to map the personal usually local office of some usually elected representative .. so locals can communicate to them and they can communicate to locals (who usually elect them). It is not about the
executive, the legislative, and the judicial branches' but about a politician trying to maintain some connection to the people that usually elect them .. so they might get re-elected.

Have I put enough 'usually' in there to keep the edge cases happy?


An example?
Tony Abbott ex PM, http://tonyabbott.com.au/ Has an office at
Level 2, 17 Sydney Road, Manly, NSW 2095 Australia. It is not the office of the Liberal Party, nor an office of what ever role he might be playing in parliament. It is an office of Tony Abbott the elected representative in this area.




On 11/4/2018 5:08 AM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:

On Sun, 4 Nov 2018 at 07:05, Warin <[hidden email]> wrote:
It's going to take some careful thought, and many postings here, to come up with a scheme
with sensible terminology that works for all those situations. 
To me these are all 'politicians' or at least serve a political role when acting (I hope) on our behalf to represent 'us'.
Don't think every situation would be happy with 'parliamentarians'.

I am not going to try and distinguish between the various levels - upper and lower houses, federal, state, local, unions etc...
That could go in the description, far too many variables around the world for a single system I think.
Lets get the first level of tagging done before contemplating a more complex area?

No, I agree with you!

I would think either of the 2 basic we mentioned should fit office=government or office=politician 

Question though (more for someone in Europe) - is a "Member of the European Parliament" elected, or just appointed by their home country? Are they a "politician" as such?

Is there another overall term for elected people? (& yes, I can think of quite a few terms for them, but I don't think we should be marking any of them on the map! :-))

Thanks

Graeme




_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Allan Mustard
In reply to this post by Warin

Paul, as Deep Throat told Bob Woodward, "Follow the money."  Who pays the rent on the office and who pays the salary of the occupant?  If the filthy lucre comes out of the government budget, and the office is used by someone drawing a government salary (as all executives, legislators, and judges do, or are supposed to, at least) then it is a government office.

By the way the UK has no monopoly on overlap between executive and legislative branches.  Since we Yanks adopted a Constitution in 1789 that makes the Vice President also the President of the Senate, our VP is technically a member of the legislative branch, and his office budget is so appropriated. 

Cheers,
apm-wa


On 11/4/2018 2:04 AM, Warin wrote:
On 04/11/18 01:41, Paul Allen wrote:

On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 3:29 AM Allan Mustard <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hmmm.  Reaching back to my bachelor's degree in political science, Parliament is also a government body, the legislative branch of the government, so even a member of the opposition is part of "government" in its broadest sense.  I would tag it office=government, government=parliamentarian or something similar.  Executive, legislative, judicial are all "government".

There's a can of annelids here, just waiting to be opened.

Over here in the UK, I have an MP (Member of Parliament) representing me in the UK national
government.  There's also the House of Lords (upper chamber), some members of which might
have unofficial offices outside of parliament buildings where they can be contacted, but a quick
search shows no evidence of such.  Since I live in Wales, I also have an AM (Assembly Member)
of the National Assembly of Wales.  And, for a few more months, I have an MEP (Member of the
European Parliament).  Scotland and Northern Ireland have devolved governments like Wales
(but different names for their assemblies and members) but England does not (don't get me
started on the West Lothian question).

Other member countries of the European Union will have MEPs in addition to representatives of
their own national governments and some may have (like the UK) devolved assemblies in
addition.  The US has state and federal government.  Oh, and don't forget that technically, the US
has three branches of government so we have to decide if we absorb the judiciary into this
(does our definition of government differ from that of the US Constitution).

It's going to take some careful thought, and many postings here, to come up with a scheme
with sensible terminology that works for all those situations. 


And those examples are only the ones 'we' are aware of. I'd like some thoughts from elsewhere.


To me these are all 'politicians' or at least serve a political role when acting (I hope) on our behalf to represent 'us'.
Don't think every situation would be happy with 'parliamentarians'.

I am not going to try and distinguish between the various levels - upper and lower houses, federal, state, local, unions etc...
That could go in the description, far too many variables around the world for a single system I think.
Lets get the first level of tagging done before contemplating a more complex area?





_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

dieterdreist


sent from a phone

> On 4. Nov 2018, at 05:54, Allan Mustard <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Paul, as Deep Throat told Bob Woodward, "Follow the money."  Who pays the rent on the office and who pays the salary of the occupant?  If the filthy lucre comes out of the government budget, and the office is used by someone drawing a government salary (as all executives, legislators, and judges do, or are supposed to, at least) then it is a government office.


what about government owned companies? Should they get a government tag?

Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Allan Mustard

If it is a profitable company that adds to the government's coffers, such as the Budvar brewery in the Czech Republic, which is government owned, I'd say no.  It should be tagged as a brewery.  Same logic would apply to Rosoboronexport, which is Russia's second-largest revenue earner as an arms exporter.  Petronas, the Malaysian government gas and oil company, should be tagged as a gas and oil company.  Same for Pemex, Petroleo Mexicano, as well as the grocery stores the Bangladeshi army operates.

If it is a budget-dependent company/corporation, such as the Commodity Credit Corporation of the U.S. government, which generates no revenue of its own and relies wholly on appropriations from the U.S. Congress, yes, it should be tagged government.  As Deep Throat said, "Follow the money!"

apm-wa


On 11/4/2018 1:29 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

sent from a phone

On 4. Nov 2018, at 05:54, Allan Mustard [hidden email] wrote:

Paul, as Deep Throat told Bob Woodward, "Follow the money."  Who pays the rent on the office and who pays the salary of the occupant?  If the filthy lucre comes out of the government budget, and the office is used by someone drawing a government salary (as all executives, legislators, and judges do, or are supposed to, at least) then it is a government office.

what about government owned companies? Should they get a government tag?

Cheers, Martin 


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Warin
Where do you draw the line?

If a 'government company' has 50% of its income from a government allocation and the rest from elsewhere (e.g. contracts with private companies/individuals) is it 'government' or not?

 On 04/11/18 20:19, Allan Mustard wrote:

If it is a profitable company that adds to the government's coffers, such as the Budvar brewery in the Czech Republic, which is government owned, I'd say no.  It should be tagged as a brewery.  Same logic would apply to Rosoboronexport, which is Russia's second-largest revenue earner as an arms exporter.  Petronas, the Malaysian government gas and oil company, should be tagged as a gas and oil company.  Same for Pemex, Petroleo Mexicano, as well as the grocery stores the Bangladeshi army operates.

If it is a budget-dependent company/corporation, such as the Commodity Credit Corporation of the U.S. government, which generates no revenue of its own and relies wholly on appropriations from the U.S. Congress, yes, it should be tagged government.  As Deep Throat said, "Follow the money!"

apm-wa


On 11/4/2018 1:29 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone

On 4. Nov 2018, at 05:54, Allan Mustard [hidden email] wrote:

Paul, as Deep Throat told Bob Woodward, "Follow the money."  Who pays the rent on the office and who pays the salary of the occupant?  If the filthy lucre comes out of the government budget, and the office is used by someone drawing a government salary (as all executives, legislators, and judges do, or are supposed to, at least) then it is a government office.
what about government owned companies? Should they get a government tag?

Cheers, Martin 



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Colin Smale

The answer will depend on whether we are talking about landuse, building, office or amenity.

Waste disposal is (in Europe) usually a statutory task, performed by a commercial company on behalf of some government. If it is open to the public, then the "amenity" provided is waste disposal / recycling. The landuse is probably something like "waste disposal" or "industrial", similar to how landfill sites might be tagged. The "office" belongs to the commercial company, so that is not governmental.

Other areas where this (outsourcing of statutory duties) is commonplace (that I know of) include public transport, administration of visa applications, healthcare provision, assessment of benefits claims, and operation of highways/infrastructure.

Government-owned companies like a brewery are IMHO nothing to do with the execution of statutory tasks and are therefore not governmental in any way, shape or form.

In the example of the Credit Corporation, does some government organisation have a statutory duty to provide credit? Or does it come under something more general like "protecting the poor"? Would the government be "failing in its statutory duty" if thie company disappeared? Otherwise it sounds like an optional, pseudo-commercial venture which in this case happens to be bankrolled by the government.

 


On 2018-11-04 11:13, Warin wrote:

Where do you draw the line?

If a 'government company' has 50% of its income from a government allocation and the rest from elsewhere (e.g. contracts with private companies/individuals) is it 'government' or not?

 On 04/11/18 20:19, Allan Mustard wrote:

If it is a profitable company that adds to the government's coffers, such as the Budvar brewery in the Czech Republic, which is government owned, I'd say no.  It should be tagged as a brewery.  Same logic would apply to Rosoboronexport, which is Russia's second-largest revenue earner as an arms exporter.  Petronas, the Malaysian government gas and oil company, should be tagged as a gas and oil company.  Same for Pemex, Petroleo Mexicano, as well as the grocery stores the Bangladeshi army operates.

If it is a budget-dependent company/corporation, such as the Commodity Credit Corporation of the U.S. government, which generates no revenue of its own and relies wholly on appropriations from the U.S. Congress, yes, it should be tagged government.  As Deep Throat said, "Follow the money!"

apm-wa


On 11/4/2018 1:29 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone

On 4. Nov 2018, at 05:54, Allan Mustard [hidden email] wrote:

Paul, as Deep Throat told Bob Woodward, "Follow the money."  Who pays the rent on the office and who pays the salary of the occupant?  If the filthy lucre comes out of the government budget, and the office is used by someone drawing a government salary (as all executives, legislators, and judges do, or are supposed to, at least) then it is a government office.
what about government owned companies? Should they get a government tag?

Cheers, Martin 



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Allan Mustard

The Commodity Credit Corporation is the U.S. equivalent of a British "crown corporation".  It has no staff of its own, a board of directors that consists of the senior political appointees of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and authority to disburse funds to farmers eligible for various government programs.  It has many statutory duties and authorities to provide credit and subsidies, dating back to legislation first passed in the Great Depression.  Programs are implemented by USDA (i.e., government) employees under these authorities.  It is about as far from a commercial enterprise as one can imagine--not even "pseudo-commercial"!  In WTO terms, it is the U.S. government's "national paying agency" for agriculture and so by international treaty is considered a government agency, even though it is incorporated in Delaware as a corporation, has a board of directors, and so on.  If the CCC had an office, it would be tagged office=government, but since CCC only exists on paper, we mappers don't really have to worry about it :-)

On 11/4/2018 3:52 PM, Colin Smale wrote:

The answer will depend on whether we are talking about landuse, building, office or amenity.

Waste disposal is (in Europe) usually a statutory task, performed by a commercial company on behalf of some government. If it is open to the public, then the "amenity" provided is waste disposal / recycling. The landuse is probably something like "waste disposal" or "industrial", similar to how landfill sites might be tagged. The "office" belongs to the commercial company, so that is not governmental.

Other areas where this (outsourcing of statutory duties) is commonplace (that I know of) include public transport, administration of visa applications, healthcare provision, assessment of benefits claims, and operation of highways/infrastructure.

Government-owned companies like a brewery are IMHO nothing to do with the execution of statutory tasks and are therefore not governmental in any way, shape or form.

In the example of the Credit Corporation, does some government organisation have a statutory duty to provide credit? Or does it come under something more general like "protecting the poor"? Would the government be "failing in its statutory duty" if thie company disappeared? Otherwise it sounds like an optional, pseudo-commercial venture which in this case happens to be bankrolled by the government.

 


On 2018-11-04 11:13, Warin wrote:

Where do you draw the line?

If a 'government company' has 50% of its income from a government allocation and the rest from elsewhere (e.g. contracts with private companies/individuals) is it 'government' or not?

 On 04/11/18 20:19, Allan Mustard wrote:

If it is a profitable company that adds to the government's coffers, such as the Budvar brewery in the Czech Republic, which is government owned, I'd say no.  It should be tagged as a brewery.  Same logic would apply to Rosoboronexport, which is Russia's second-largest revenue earner as an arms exporter.  Petronas, the Malaysian government gas and oil company, should be tagged as a gas and oil company.  Same for Pemex, Petroleo Mexicano, as well as the grocery stores the Bangladeshi army operates.

If it is a budget-dependent company/corporation, such as the Commodity Credit Corporation of the U.S. government, which generates no revenue of its own and relies wholly on appropriations from the U.S. Congress, yes, it should be tagged government.  As Deep Throat said, "Follow the money!"

apm-wa


On 11/4/2018 1:29 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone

On 4. Nov 2018, at 05:54, Allan Mustard [hidden email] wrote:

Paul, as Deep Throat told Bob Woodward, "Follow the money."  Who pays the rent on the office and who pays the salary of the occupant?  If the filthy lucre comes out of the government budget, and the office is used by someone drawing a government salary (as all executives, legislators, and judges do, or are supposed to, at least) then it is a government office.
what about government owned companies? Should they get a government tag?

Cheers, Martin 



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Colin Smale

Thanks for the clear explanation, Allan!

Although if it really has zero staff, I do wonder who employs the people who "push the buttons" - authorising and approving payments etc. Do they work for the Dept of Agriculture? Are they technically "contractors" to the CCC?

 


On 2018-11-04 13:43, Allan Mustard wrote:

The Commodity Credit Corporation is the U.S. equivalent of a British "crown corporation".  It has no staff of its own, a board of directors that consists of the senior political appointees of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and authority to disburse funds to farmers eligible for various government programs.  It has many statutory duties and authorities to provide credit and subsidies, dating back to legislation first passed in the Great Depression.  Programs are implemented by USDA (i.e., government) employees under these authorities.  It is about as far from a commercial enterprise as one can imagine--not even "pseudo-commercial"!  In WTO terms, it is the U.S. government's "national paying agency" for agriculture and so by international treaty is considered a government agency, even though it is incorporated in Delaware as a corporation, has a board of directors, and so on.  If the CCC had an office, it would be tagged office=government, but since CCC only exists on paper, we mappers don't really have to worry about it :-)

On 11/4/2018 3:52 PM, Colin Smale wrote:

The answer will depend on whether we are talking about landuse, building, office or amenity.

Waste disposal is (in Europe) usually a statutory task, performed by a commercial company on behalf of some government. If it is open to the public, then the "amenity" provided is waste disposal / recycling. The landuse is probably something like "waste disposal" or "industrial", similar to how landfill sites might be tagged. The "office" belongs to the commercial company, so that is not governmental.

Other areas where this (outsourcing of statutory duties) is commonplace (that I know of) include public transport, administration of visa applications, healthcare provision, assessment of benefits claims, and operation of highways/infrastructure.

Government-owned companies like a brewery are IMHO nothing to do with the execution of statutory tasks and are therefore not governmental in any way, shape or form.

In the example of the Credit Corporation, does some government organisation have a statutory duty to provide credit? Or does it come under something more general like "protecting the poor"? Would the government be "failing in its statutory duty" if thie company disappeared? Otherwise it sounds like an optional, pseudo-commercial venture which in this case happens to be bankrolled by the government.

 


On 2018-11-04 11:13, Warin wrote:

Where do you draw the line?

If a 'government company' has 50% of its income from a government allocation and the rest from elsewhere (e.g. contracts with private companies/individuals) is it 'government' or not?

 On 04/11/18 20:19, Allan Mustard wrote:

If it is a profitable company that adds to the government's coffers, such as the Budvar brewery in the Czech Republic, which is government owned, I'd say no.  It should be tagged as a brewery.  Same logic would apply to Rosoboronexport, which is Russia's second-largest revenue earner as an arms exporter.  Petronas, the Malaysian government gas and oil company, should be tagged as a gas and oil company.  Same for Pemex, Petroleo Mexicano, as well as the grocery stores the Bangladeshi army operates.

If it is a budget-dependent company/corporation, such as the Commodity Credit Corporation of the U.S. government, which generates no revenue of its own and relies wholly on appropriations from the U.S. Congress, yes, it should be tagged government.  As Deep Throat said, "Follow the money!"

apm-wa


On 11/4/2018 1:29 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone

On 4. Nov 2018, at 05:54, Allan Mustard [hidden email] wrote:

Paul, as Deep Throat told Bob Woodward, "Follow the money."  Who pays the rent on the office and who pays the salary of the occupant?  If the filthy lucre comes out of the government budget, and the office is used by someone drawing a government salary (as all executives, legislators, and judges do, or are supposed to, at least) then it is a government office.
what about government owned companies? Should they get a government tag?

Cheers, Martin 



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Allan Mustard


sent from a phone

On 4. Nov 2018, at 10:19, Allan Mustard <[hidden email]> wrote:

If it is a budget-dependent company/corporation, such as the Commodity Credit Corporation of the U.S. government, which generates no revenue of its own and relies wholly on appropriations from the U.S. Congress, yes, it should be tagged government.  As Deep Throat said, "Follow the money!"



I find this difficult, because it implies we define what is original government duty and what is not. Providing beer is apparently not a government job (any more?), providing healthcare might be (?), what about transportation? Is free public transportation a government duty? They surely wouldn’t generate (at least direct) profits, and if the service isn’t free it could still be financed by the government and not be profitable. Similarly the providing of energy, water, the treatment of waste. Europeans tend to see prisons as government sites, in the US prisons are often private.

Ciao, Martin 




_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament

Colin Smale

The activity of a prison is on behalf of a government, pursuant to a statutory duty of the government to administer justice. That its operation is outsourced to a private company doesn't change that fact. You can't just start your own prison - it is a state monopoly.

Public transport may be a state monopoly, but sometimes it isn't. In the middle you have state regulation, which is the status in much of the UK. Anyone can start a bus company, but you need to register the route at least. (I think it might be a bit more complicated than that...) Providing free transport, well, I suppose anyone can make it free if they want, but the money has to come from somewhere...


On 2018-11-04 15:41, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:



sent from a phone

On 4. Nov 2018, at 10:19, Allan Mustard <[hidden email]> wrote:

If it is a budget-dependent company/corporation, such as the Commodity Credit Corporation of the U.S. government, which generates no revenue of its own and relies wholly on appropriations from the U.S. Congress, yes, it should be tagged government.  As Deep Throat said, "Follow the money!"



 
I find this difficult, because it implies we define what is original government duty and what is not. Providing beer is apparently not a government job (any more?), providing healthcare might be (?), what about transportation? Is free public transportation a government duty? They surely wouldn't generate (at least direct) profits, and if the service isn't free it could still be financed by the government and not be profitable. Similarly the providing of energy, water, the treatment of waste. Europeans tend to see prisons as government sites, in the US prisons are often private.
 
Ciao, Martin 
 
 
 

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
12