{"id":1796,"date":"2025-09-12T13:34:31","date_gmt":"2025-09-12T12:34:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.data-pro.nu\/?p=1796"},"modified":"2025-09-12T13:34:31","modified_gmt":"2025-09-12T12:34:31","slug":"waterschap-vechtstromen-leert-niets-van-hardenberg","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.data-pro.nu\/en\/waterschap-vechtstromen-leert-niets-van-hardenberg\/","title":{"rendered":"Water Board Vechtstroom learns nothing from Hardenberg"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>Our local authorities as digital satellite states<\/strong>
The Water Board Vechtstroom does exactly the same as the municipality of Hardenberg: transfer our local government systems and data to a foreign power. It is as if one deliberately chooses to put digital sovereignty on sale. My surprise borders on anger.<\/strong>. How can a public institution that has to ensure our water management knowingly make its data dependent on Microsoft Azure Databricks?<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cDigital autonomy is not a luxury, it is a precondition for true democracy.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

No digital knowledge at the top<\/strong>
If you look through the electoral lists for the upcoming elections, you will immediately see: Digital knowledge is often lacking at the top. But there are exceptions, and Barbara Kathmann<\/a> is a good example of this. It shows that digital issues do deserve political weight. Instead of looking away, she emphasizes that the House of Representatives urgently needs digital expertise. We need politicians like this: people who understand that cloud monopolies, data storage and digital security are fundamental societal themes.<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cThose who do not understand technology do not understand power in the 21st century.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Decision-making in the air<\/strong>
Water boards and municipalities make these kinds of decisions for four possible reasons:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. They're tone-deaf.<\/li>\n
  2. The decisions are taken by local politicians without digital baggage.<\/li>\n
  3. The decisions are driven by technicians who have no idea of the social consequences.<\/li>\n
  4. They choose the cheapest solution and sell social security for a discount.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    No matter how you turn it around: this is administrative short-sightedness<\/strong> in optima forma.<\/p>\n

    \n

    \u201cCheap is rarely sustainable and never independent.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

    Why? Why? Why?<\/strong>
    I can put a thousand words into this, but it fits into one question: Why? Why does a local government knowingly depend on foreign hyperscalers? Why is it accepted that data from citizens and institutions will soon be in the hands of companies operating under legislation that has no respect for our democratic control? Why? Why? Why?<\/p>\n

    \n

    \u201cThe price of convenience is always dependency.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

    An urgent apple<\/strong>
    I expect more intelligence and more backbone from our governments. Any effort that increases the binding with foreign hyperscalers should be avoided. Digital sovereignty is not something for experts on the margins, but a matter of national importance. Water authorities and municipalities should be the first to understand this. The time of simply choosing the cheapest provider is over.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n

    \u201cDigital sovereignty is not a hobby, it is a duty.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

    Sources:<\/p>\n