ADVISORY PANEL ON PUBLIC SECTOR INFORMATION
Date:
Time:
Venue:
21 September 2012
10:45am-4:15pm
(Room 5.28b) Petty France Ministry of Justice
Attendees: Chair
Members
Professor David Rhind, CBE
Peter Wienand, Deputy Chair
Prabaht Vaze, Expert Member
Patricia Seex, Expert Member
Hilary Newiss, Expert Member
Shane O’Neill, Expert Member
Phillip Webb, Expert Member
Dean White, Expert Member
Paul Longley, Expert Member
Hugh Neffendorf, Expert Member
Robert Barr, Expert Member
Michael Jennings, Representative Member
David Lammey, Representative Member for Northern Ireland
Bill Oates, Representative Member for Wales
Nonmembers:
Carol Tullo, Director of Information Policy and Services, The National
Archives
Heather Savory, Chair of Open Data User Group
Marcia Jackson, Head of Standards, The National Archives
Beth Brook, Business and Policy Manager, The National Archives
Catherine Hill , Personal Assistant to Carol Tullo
Chris Fisher Information Policy and Services Business Co-ordinator
1.
Welcome, introductions and apologies
The Chairman welcomed members to the 37th meeting of APPSI.
1.1
The Chairman noted that he had received apologies of absence by members; Michael Nicholson,
Neil Ackroyd, Keith Dugmore, and Duncan Macniven.
1.2
The Chairman also noted that Ms Catherine Hill was attending on behalf of the Secretariat Paul
Edwards who had also given his apologies.
1.3
The Chairman welcomed the newly appointed chair of the Open Data User Group to the meeting
Ms Heather Savory.
1
2.
Minutes and actions of the last meeting
2.1
Members approved the minutes of the APPSI meeting on 09 July 2012 as an accurate record of
the matters discussed.
2.2
Actions from previous meetings
ACTION: Chairman to invite Professor Nigel Shadbolt to a forthcoming APPSI meeting to discuss the
Open Data Institute. Status: Ongoing.
ACTION: Mr Bob Barr to continue to refine the glossary document and for it to be reviewed at a future
meeting. Status: Ongoing see Item 6.
2.3 Matters arising from previous meeting on 09 July 2012
ITEM 5 ACTION: Bob Barr and a small working group consisting of; Neil Ackroyd, Hugh Neffendorf,
and Phillip Webb to finalize the terminology analysis. Status: Completed: the group met in July and
went through Bob’s initial draft - Bob and Hugh to summarise the latest developments- (See Item 6)
ITEM 5 ACTION: APPSI to share its terminology analysis with Cabinet Office once ready. Status:
Ongoing – CO has seen various versions of the glossary, Bob Barr and the Secretariat took part in a
development workshop to develop a wiki exercise. Seb Tallents and his Cabinet Office colleagues from
the transparency team were in attendance.
ITEM 6 ACTION: APPSI to propose to present at a future Data Strategy Board meeting once NIF paper
is finalised. Status: Ongoing – to be proposed when circulating final version to Angela Latta deputy
director of the Data Strategy Board.
ITEM 7 ACTION: Invite a senior representative of the Cabinet Office such as Mr Mike Bracken to a
future meeting to discuss data access infrastructure – Status: Completed- The Secretariat has invited Mr
Bracken to attend a future APPSI meeting.
ITEM 8 ACTION: David Rhind and Hugh Neffendorf to incorporate final comments from members into
the latest draft of the NIF. Status: Ongoing (See Item 7)
ITEM 8 ACTION: Secretariat to circulate the final version of NIF to APPSI Members. Status:
Completed: Circulated as part of papers for this meeting – approval to be sought from members at this
meeting.
ITEM 8 ACTION: David Rhind and Hugh Neffendorf & Secretariat, to explore publishing the NIF
concept as a journal article. Status: Ongoing: To be discussed at Item
ITEM 8 ACTION: APPSI members to utilise contacts to engage with the wider PSI community in
proselytising the NIF concept. Ongoing: Action has been tabled for discussion – See Item 7.
2
Item 3: Update on Public Sector Information within the UK and elsewhere – Ms Carol Tullo,
National Archives
3.1
PSI Directive - Impact Assessment
Ms Carol Tullo informed members that The National Archives (TNA) draft Impact Assessment
(IA) had been circulated to a wide range of stakeholders for comments in early September.
3.2
Carol thanked APPSI members for the feedback she had received from APPSI members Shane
O’Neil and Patricia Seex on the IA.
3.3
PSI Directive Amendments – negotiations in Europe
Carol noted that the European Council Working group on the PSI Directive met on 7 September
2012 to consider a new compromise text from the Presidency. She explained that her colleagues Jim
Wretham and Beth Brook attended a meeting on the 20 September 2012; she felt this work would
likely be completed during the Cypriot presidency i.e. before end-December.
3.4
The National Archives has provided briefings for MEPS on the UK position via UKRep. The
European Parliament committees have published several rapporteur reports with draft amendments
and draft opinions from other committees.
3.5
Datasets section –FOIA/POFA
Carol highlighted that The S45 Code of Practice (dealing with the new datasets provisions in the
Freedom of Information Act sections 11A and 19) was in the process of being drafted and
coordinated by Cabinet Office, with TNA, Ministry of Justice (MoJ) and Information Commission
Office (ICO) input. She explained that the Cabinet Office will be seeking to clear the draft with the
Transparency Senior Officials Group, and then will look to publish via a wiki for wider
consultation.
3.6
Regulation – IFTS re-verifications ahead
The Coal Authority – October 2012-09-27
Environment Agency – January 2013
Registers of Scotland – February 2013
Driving Standards Agency – March 2013
HS Laboratory – Spring 2013.
3.5
Carol Tullo explained that there were various workshops on the horizon including the ICO
regulation workshop on 28/09 and NHS workshop re IA validation (26/9)
3.6
Carol confirmed that the government remained keen for an Independent Review of PSI. She
confirmed that this will be conducted under the stewardship of the Data Strategy Board. Carol
explained that the recent ministerial shuffles had caused some delay to the BIS announcement of
the draft Terms of Reference for the PSI market review; it was still awaiting ministerial approval.
3.8
APPSI members David Lammey and Bill Oates both confirmed that the issue of the extent of
involvement of the devolved administrations with the DSB had not yet been resolved and they felt
there was uncertainty as to the brief of the Government Officials Forum.
3.9
Marcia Jackson noted that she expects several Fair Trader verifications coming through to The
National Archives before the end of March 2013. Marcia confirmed that she will also be conducting
workshops to define public task for cultural bodies being brought within the Directive.
3.10 The Chairman felt it was important to understand the number of requests and asked Marcia if she
could confirm the figures for the number of derived data exemption requests Ordnance Survey have
received.
3
3.11 Carol Tullo confirmed that the new Minister for The National Archives Helen Grant MP has been
given responsibility for data protection. She explained that Lord McNally had kept responsibility
for FOI but that it had yet to be confirmed where Transparency and PSI will sit. Carol said that
she would ask the Secretariat to update APPSI once she knew.
ACTION: Secretariat to circulate the draft terms of reference for the PSI review when available.
Item 4: The Role of Open Data User Group
4.1 The Chairman welcomed the Chair of the Open Data User Group (ODUG) Heather Savory to the
meeting with APPSI to explain the role of and her aims for ODUG.
4.2 Heather explained that in June (2012) she had held an event for all interested parties to apply to
members of the Group. She confirmed that she had received 75 applications and that selection was
involved trying to achieve a broad base of experience and backgrounds. She went on to say that the
group had been very active meeting prior to its first formal meeting on the 10 July 2012 1 in order to
establish:
i) Terms of reference – the primary focus would be on data from Trading Funds but would
also cover all public sector Open Data.
ii) A new data request mechanism via data.gov.uk, designed to be completely accessible by
anyone. This will be announced on 26th September as part of the Open Government
partnership licence.
4.3 Heather confirmed that the ODUG will assess the barriers to the use of Open Data and hoped to
enhance the public level of understanding with the publication of simple notes. It would try and
influence the early release of useful data. She acknowledged that ODUG had yet to address the issue
of user needs of large scale data sets e.g. academic data or census data but that this would also be a
focus in due course.
4.4 Bill Oates observed that data.gov.uk was failing to point people to existing open data and wondered
whether APPSI should make a recommendation to TNA for a simple transparent mechanism of
making everything available under existing open licences?
4.5 Heather said that ODUG would assess the cost, production, and delivery of data, although admitted
that that they should look to avoid being diverted by a large amount of cost analysis.
4.6 The pricing of the commissioned public data sets was discussed. It was suggested that tenders should
be invited to price on both the cost of provision of raw data and on the cost of analysing it and /or
retaining a certain percentage of intellectual property. This would provide Heather with a useful cost
comparison basis.
4.7 Heather asked all APPSI members to send her any comments/suggestions on her approach.
ACTION: Invitation from Heather Savory for APPSI members to provide comments /suggestions
regarding her approach with ODUG.
Item 5: Update on PSI terminology/ Glossary pilot exercise; APPSI Member Bob Barr
1
http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/news/open-data-user-group-help-unleash-potential-open-data
4
5.1 Bob Bar thanked Hugh Neffendorf, Phillip Webb, Neil Ackroyd, and the Secretariat for their input
and help on the glossary work. He emphasised that the purpose of this presentation was to focus on
the glossary approach, and APPSI’s activities and relationship with the Cabinet Office.
5.2 Bob summarised the work undertaken by the APPSI working group which met on 24 July 2012. He
explained that the group considered the spreadsheet he had presented at the previous APPSI meeting
and went through each of the definitions from the six sources. A preferred definition was selected or
an action was noted for more investigation. Each definition was then given a judgemental quality
score. The group also produced a supplementary list of terms which they felt that might also require
definitions.
5.3 Hugh Neffendorf noted that the APPSI Glossary was not designed to be a policy development tool
but a universal advisory document to generate cohesive within the PSI community. APPSI members
agreed that the latest version – v4.3 – should be published on the APPSI website when ready.
Following further discussion with members it was recognised that some definitions relating to OS
and Trading Funds, as well as some of the defined legal terms, needed further consideration or
commentary as to why a definition might need to kept or improved.
5.4 Neil Ackroyd agreed to comment on those terms related to Ordnance Survey or trading funds, and
Phillip Webb and Patricia Seex agreed to liaise on the economic terms, with Peter Wienand offering
to consider those which were legally defined.
5.5 Following this discussion members discussed the roles and responsibilities of the wider wiki
exercise aimed at engaging the wider PSI community views on those terms identified by APPSI as
needing improvement. Bob Barr stated that APPSI role should very much be centred on moderating
substantive issues regarding the actual debate of key terms. It was agreed that daily housekeeping
issues, on matters relating to the technical operations of the Wiki, and the handling of any potential
abuse during the exercise are very much the responsibility of the Cabinet Office.
5.6 Bob and Hugh explained that once the wiki exercise had taken place, there would be a review period
for APPSI to consider the feedback provided in the Wiki. They acknowledged that a discussion
would then be needed with Carol Tullo and The National Archives on how best to publish the ‘final’
version on how often it should be reviewed. Bob stressed that in the first instance peer review
should be an APPSI function and that the Secretariat should be the first point of contact for issues
relating to TNA.
ACTION: Secretariat to draft a publication and control strategy for the long term management of APPSI
glossary document.
ACTION: Patricia Seex and Phillip Webb to submit those definitions associated to cost for the glossary,
to Hugh Neffendorf by early October 2012.
ACTION: Peter Weinand to provide commentary on the legal definitions within the APPSI glossary
Item 6. Establishing a National Information Framework - the next Steps, APPSI Chair David Rhind,
and Mr Hugh Neffendorf.
6.1 Following the last meeting in July the Chairman noted that a lot of hard work had been undertaken
from Hugh Neffendorf, Michael Jennings and others to get the National Information Framework into
a finalised version. He stressed that the purpose of the discussion was to allow members to comment
5
on the proposed final version and to allow any final amendments before being published on the
website and a update letter and submission being sent to the Minister.
6.2 Styling and editorial suggestions were offered by some of the members. Philip Webb suggested that
the paper should be made more formal with numbering of the paragraphs set within the paragraphs.
It was also agreed that the published version would benefit from an index, and that a foreword from
the chair might be beneficial to explain the background of their latest views of a NIF.
6.3 Members discussed the title of the paper and it was felt that some form of subtitle such as an ‘APPSI
Thought Piece’, or ‘APPSI Green Paper’ would help to distinguish the work as considerations of
APPSI.
6.4 There was agreement that the responsible minister should have sight of the document prior to
general circulation, but given the parliamentary recess, it would be appropriate to proceed with
publishing the latest version of the paper on the APPSI web pages.
ACTION: David Rhind to write forward/covering letter for the National Information Framework
document.
ACTION: Secretariat to draft covering submission and forward with covering letter and paper to the
minister’s private office.
ACTION: David Rhind and Hugh Neffendorf & Secretariat, to explore publishing the concept as a
journal article.
ACTION: APPSI membership to consider how best to engage with the wider PSI community in
proselytising the concept.
Item 7: APPSI updates - PSI in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
7.1 The Chairman noted that David Lammey and Duncan Macniven provided a written update see Annex
A.
Item 8: Next Steps for APPSI
8. 1 Members agreed that for the forthcoming meeting it would be useful to explore the Open Data and
transparency agenda from a commercial perspective. Hugh Neffendorf suggested if Nigel Shadbolt
could attend it would be worth having a meeting for the whole day on ODI.
8.2
APPSI members were particularly interested in getting the view of large commercial bodies on their
view on Open Data.
ACTION Secretariat and David Rhind to explore inviting commercial representatives of Open Data to a
future meeting.
Item 9: Any Other Business
9.1
Members discussed the Royal Mail (RM) Pinpoint initiative to create a geo-referenced address data
product. Many APPSI members raised concerns over the proposal, and took the view that while
not explicitly a Royal Mail objective, the initiative could duplicate what is already produced jointly
by Ordnance Survey and the Local Authorities.
6
9.2
Members of APPSI felt strongly that the existing Geo-place product benefits public sector bodies
and their commercial agents alike: particularly that it is free to use by most of the public sector that
are covered by the Public Sector Mapping Agreement (PSMA).
9.3
Some members felt that with the RM- Pinpoint initiative, private sector bodies in particular may
decide to use a new RM product on a price basis if it is cheaper. The Chairman and some members
felt that there was a distinct risk that the use of inconsistent data files describing geographical
reality, could cause real difficulties in the delivery of services, including many which involve
emergencies. This was APPSI’s main cause for concern over the RM plans.
9.4
Some members also felt that the initiative did not align with the government’s desire and
importance for having a definitive data set. APPSI members noted the minutes of the
Transparency Board of 8 June 2011 record that a single definitive national address file should be
forged by the fusing of the GeoPlace product with the RM’s Postal Address File 2.
9.5
APPSI members were of the view that there might be merit in outlining the issue in a letter to the
Shareholder Executive. Members agreed though that any letter would need to be neutral and that it
would worth clarifying the facts before taking forward.
ACTION: David Rhind to reflect upon the RM issue, and whether a letter to the Shareholder Executive
would be appropriate.
Officials Forum meeting update from Carol Tullo:
9.6
Carol Tullo gave APPSI an update from the Official Forum meeting she attended during the APPSI
lunch break. She noted that:
•
•
•
•
ODUG had been on the agenda and that Matthew Hancock would be the responsible Minister
The terms of reference for the Public Sector Information Review had been agreed, and that write
round to the relevant parties would happen in due course.
Outstanding work from Public Data Group review on public task would be addressed in the New
Year.
Derived? data/3rd party licensing was identified as a big issue and would be going to the DSB for
further discussion.
OS review of the impact and benefits of their move to Open data
9.7 The Chairman noted that a report has been produced following the Ordnance Survey review of their
move to Open Data. He felt that the report would be of great importance for the Open Data
community – and that it was of some concern that it had not yet been published.
Meeting Closed:
The Chairman noted that the next meeting was due to take place in the Blue Room at The National
Archives on 11December 2012.
2
http://data.gov.uk/blog/transparency-board-minutes-8th-june-2011
7
ANNEX A APPSI MEETING – 21 September 2012
SCOTLAND UPDATE
The Scottish Government has created a Directorate of Digital Public Services and is working towards a
Digital Strategy. Data management and governance is one of the strands of this Strategy, which will be
emerging during the autumn. Implementation of the McClelland Report (on the use and strategic
management of information and communications technology within the public sector in Scotland,
published last summer) is highlighting the need for open standards and formats to underpin effective
collaboration and data sharing between public bodies. The Scottish Government is considering
commissioning work on the economic and business value of public sector information to Scotland and
the Panel's views on the appropriateness and possible methodological approaches would be helpful.
Duncan Macniven
11 September 2012
NORTHERN IRELAND UPDATE
Open Data
1.
2.
3.
4.
Awaiting Ministerial approval for bi-lateral meetings to take place between Data Strategy Board
(DSB) Chair and NI Civil Service officials. It is anticipated that the first such meeting would be
held in Belfast.
The second meeting of the DSB Government Officials’ Forum is to be held on 21 September.
Northern Ireland is represented on the Forum.
NI Civil Service group established to consider and advise on ‘Data sets and Open Government’
issues had its first meeting on 31 August.
Open Data proposals for Northern Ireland are being drafted by Department of Finance &
Personnel officials. Key NI Civil Service stakeholders will be consulted on the draft paper.
Anonymisation Code of Practice
4.
5.
On 27 September the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) is holding a half-day conference
in Belfast on Disclosure, Governance and Protecting Information to mark the launch of its
Anonymisation Code of Practice.
The Code provides guidance on how personal information can be successfully anonymised, and
how to assess the risks of identification.
Post-legislative Scrutiny of FOI Act
6.
Ministry of Justice (MoJ) should be consulting very soon on the UK government’s response to the
Justice Committee’s report.
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012: FOI provisions on ‘datasets’
7.
Cabinet Office is leading work on the drafting of a new FOI Act s.45 Code of Practice to provide
guidance to public authorities on implementing their new duties in the ‘datasets’ section of FOI
Act. Following consultation with the MoJ, TNA and the ICO, it has decided to produce a new
Code rather than amend the existing one. This should make it easier for public authorities to use
the guidance, bearing in mind that the existing Code may have to be amended in the wake of the
aforementioned Post-legislative Scrutiny exercise.
David Lammey
17 September 201
8