ADVISORY PANEL ON PUBLIC SECTOR INFORMATION
Date:
Time:
Venue:
Rescheduled: 09 July 2012
10:45am-4:15pm
The Blue Room, The National Archives.
Attendees: Chair
Members
Professor David Rhind, CBE
Peter Wienand, Deputy Chair
Prabaht Vaze, Expert Member
Niel Ackroyd, 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
Keith Dugmore Expert Member
Michael Nicholson Expert Member
Michael Jennings Representative Member
David Lammey Representative Member for Northern Ireland
Bill Oates, Representative Member for Wales
Duncan Macniven, Representative Member for Scotland
Nonmembers:
1.
Paul Edwards, APPSI Secretariat, The National Archives
Carol Tullo, Director of Information Policy and Services, The National
Archives
Marcia Jackson, Head of Standards, The National Archives
Beth Brook, Business and Policy Manager, The National Archives
Angela Latta, Deputy Director, Data Strategy Board
Simon French Head of Programme, Transparency Team
Simon Briscoe Timetric – Vice President of Product
Welcome, introductions and apologies
The Chairman welcomed members to the 36th meeting of APPSI.
1.1
The Chairman noted that the meeting had been rescheduled from the 15 June 2012 and thanked
members for being accommodating over the change of date.
1.2
Apologies of absence were received by members Patricia Seex and Hillary Newiss.
1.3
Apologies were also received from the Chair of Open Data User Group on the day due to
conflicting diary commitments.
1.4
The Chairman welcomed Angela Latta and Simon Briscoe to the meeting.
1.5
The Chairman noted that the Keith Dugmore’s current term was coming to a close on 30
September. He confirmed that the Minister had considered and approved the recommendation for
Mr Dugmore to be reappointed for a final term.
2.
Minutes and actions of the last meeting
2.1
Members approved the minutes of the APPSI meeting on 20 April 2012 as an accurate record of the
matters discussed.
Ongoing actions from earlier 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 pilot sample and to be reviewed at a future meeting.
Status: Ongoing see item 7
ACTION: Ms Tullo to summarise Bob’s work with Transparency Board colleagues at a future meeting.
Status: Completed: Carol confirmed that she had circulated the email to her colleagues and explained
that she had tried to initiate colleagues in the Cabinet Office to reference the work in the Open Data
White Paper. She noted that it was unfortunate that Mr Bob Barr and the Cabinet Office had not been
able to liaise with each other before the deadline for the publication of the paper had passed.
ACTION: APPSI members to provide comments on how the NII paper can be developed further. Status:
Completed: See Item 8
ACTION: Secretariat to circulate 2nd May meeting note between the APPSI Chair and Hugh Neffendorf
with members. Status: Completed: The meeting note was circulated via email on 5 May 2012.
ACTION: APPSI actions and next steps for the NII to be carried to the next meeting. Status:
Completed: See Item 8
Item 3: Update on Public Sector Information within the UK and elsewhere – Ms Carol Tullo,
National Archives
European Commission Proposal to amend the PSI Directive - (UK perspective)
3.1 Ms Carol Tullo noted that in the previous month the Government agreed the UK position during
negotiations with the Council, Commission and Presidency in Europe, there being a particular focus
on charging and bringing museums, libraries and archives into the Directive’s scope.
3.2 Carol confirmed that an impact assessment was being completed by The National Archives setting
out the costs and benefits of the Directive Proposal as part of negotiations process. She said that the
assessment will seek to assess the financial impact of the Proposal, particularly the move to
marginal cost pricing, mandatory re-use and the financial impact of any changes to the regulatory
regime.
3.3 Carol said that The National Archives had been working closely with key sectors, including local
government, the NHS, trading funds and cultural institutions. Work has included a survey of local
government. The National Archives are also collating evidence on the economic benefits of
increased re-use. A number of economists from various departments are assisting.
3.4 Carol stated that the Cypriot Presidency would continue negotiations on this and with the aim to start
negotiations with the Parliament to reach a first reading agreement. She also confirmed that the
Council Working Party on Telecommunications and the Information Society will resume discussions
on on 20 July.
3.5 Carol confirmed that the European Parliament will begin its consideration of the proposed
amendments to the Directive in the autumn of the rapporteur’s report at the Industry, Research and
Energy Committee (ITRE) between September and November. A European Parliament plenary
sitting is forecast for 10 December 2012.
3.6 Carol felt that, in general, Member States have welcomed the European Commission’s proposal on
amending the directive and have supported its aims, although a number of delegations have indicated
that the amending directive is still being considered internally and have placed scrutiny reservations
on the text.
European Council, 8 June 2012: Exchange of views
3.7 At European Council meeting during the exchange of views, Member States were broadly positive
towards the proposal but several expressed concerns about the cost of making data available at a
time when public budgets were under pressure.
3.8 The UK supported the Proposal and highlighted the economic benefits of making Public Sector
Information (PSI) available, whilst registering the need to take account of the implications for public
bodies with different funding models, especially those that derive income from the sale and licensing
of data.
3.9 Neelie Kroes, Vice-President for the European Commission responsible for the Digital Agenda,
responded that most of the information in question had already been paid for by the taxpayer; there
were opportunities to build a market whose value could rise from the current EUR 32 billion to four
times that amount.
The National Archives business
3.10 Carol confirmed that the Standards Team has received three potential complaints over the last month
or so. She said the complaints are in the early stages, and it is not clear whether any will result in
being raised formally.
3.10 Derived Data: The first meeting of the Independent Advisory Group on Derived data will take place
on 20 July. This group was set up to consider requests for use of data derived from Ordnance
Survey products. Marcia Jackson the Head of Standards at TNA is chairing the group. Other
members include the Business Innovation and Skills department (BIS) and Shareholder Executive.
3.11 Ms Tullo note that a number of business cases have been made to TNA on charging above marginal
cost pricing recently. Some of these are ongoing, and a number of other applications have been
refused. Approved business cases include Met Police, National College for School Leadership and
National Offender Management Service. All of these bodies have been granted a delegation and
will be regulated under Information Fair Traders Scheme (IFTS) to ensure fair trading.
Open Data and Transparency
3.12 Carol noted that since the last APPSI meeting in April, the Open Data White Paper had been
published on 28 June 2012 and the Open Data User group was also announced on 21 May 2012.
3.13
Data Strategy Board (DSB) /Public Data Group (PDG): Carol confirmed that a ‘Government
Officials’ forum has been created to discuss the scope of the Data Strategy Board and PDG. The
Forum ensures that there is collaborative input from officials across all PSI –relevant departments.
The first meeting is scheduled to take place on 18 July 2012.
3.14 Right to Data: Carol noted that the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 was granted Royal Assent in
May 2012. The Act enables amendments to be made to the Freedom of Information Act, which
will require all public sector departments and bodies to publish datasets and ensure datasets are
available in a re-usable format.
3.15 The National Archives is working closely with the Information Commissioner’s Office on the
practicalities of implementing measures within the Protection of Freedoms Act, such as the legal
implications and enforcement issues.
3.16 S.45 Code of Practice: Carol stated that the under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, the Code
is to be revised to cover data sets in Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The National Archives
are working with the Cabinet Office, Ministry of Justice and the Information Commissioner’s
Office on development of code to be put out via a wiki. Carol noted that the revision of the Code of
Practice is limited to the new data sets clause and not to any other pre-existing sections of the
FOIA.
3.17 Policy Exchange Big Data Opportunity1: Carol noted that the paper authored by Chris Yiu was
published on 3 July 2012 with a launch event from Francis Maude and Cabinet Office.
Item 4: The Role of Open Data User Group
4.1
Ms Heather Savory ODUG was unable to attend; the Chairman therefore brought forward Item 7
on the agenda.
Item 5: Update on PSI terminology-/-vocabulary pilot exercise; APPSI Member Bob Barr
5.1
Further to his presentation at the last meeting Bob Barr highlighted the progress he had made of
sampling existing Public Sector Information glossaries. He confirmed that he had extended his
work to include the glossary from the Cabinet Office Open Data White Paper. Bob Barr noted that
upon further analysis, there were few overlaps between glossaries on the definitions they used.
5.2
Bob Barr said that it was clear the glossaries were not capturing a common language used for
describing public sector information. The problem, therefore, is not just that the same terms are
being used in different ways by different organizations, but that different terms are being used
entirely or organizations are poor in identifying the core set of terms used.
5.3
Bob Barr felt that the need for collective language on PSI has been acknowledged in government.
There was a shared view that APPSI’s discussions to date may have indirectly helped the Cabinet
1
http://policyexchange.org.uk/publications/category/item/the-big-data-opportunity-making-government-fastersmarter-and-more-personal
Office spawn the notion of a wiki-glossary; and an area in which APPSI can continue to contribute
with its wealth of expertise.
5.4
Members largely agreed that while a wiki glossary would gain a wide spectrum of contributors, and
therefore, it would not offer enough of a rigid framework to ensure definitive terms are not missused. Members were of agreement APPSIs could work well in providing the wiki consultation a
basis from which contributors to the wiki exercise could build from.
5.5
Bob Barr noted that The National Archives PSI glossary was very comprehensive with 38 terms,
and there was agreement among members that a collaborative effort between TNA and APPSI
would work well in trying to refine an ‘approved’ set of terms to share with Cabinet Office.
5.6
Simon French welcomed the analytical approach being under taken by APPSI and agreed that it
would be valuable to incorporate the work as part of the Cabinet Office’s wiki exercise.
5.7 APPSI members agreed that it was important to get the glossary work completed in a timely fashion,
and that it would be beneficial for a small working group to meet outside of the meeting to finalize
the set of terms to share with Cabinet Office. Hugh Neffendorf, Philip Webb and Neil Ackroyd all
agreed to join Bob to form the working group and requested a small amount of clerical assistance
from the Secretariat in advance of the working group meeting on 24 July 2012.
ACTION: Bob Barr and a Small working group consisting of; Neil Ackroyd, Hugh Neffendorf, and
Phillip Webb to finalize the terminology analysis.
ACTION: APPSI to share its terminology analysis with Cabinet Office once ready. (APPSI has offered to
take a leading role on moderating the Wiki Consultation).
Item 6: Update on the Data Strategy Board - Deputy Director DSB - Angela Latta
6.1
Angela Latta welcomed the opportunity to join APPSI at a formal meeting following her meeting to
discuss the National Information Infrastructure with David Rhind and Hugh Neffendorf on 2 May
2012.2 Angela summarized the role of the Data Strategy Board (DSB) with members. She
confirmed that The DSB's key purpose is to create maximum value, for businesses and people
across the UK, from data held by the Public Data Group Trading Funds: Ordnance Survey, Met
Office, Land Registry, and Companies House.
6.2
Angela confirmed that the Data Strategy Board will steer the management of contracts for weather
and geographic information and consider how data might generate economic growth from the
Trading Funds on behalf of the public sector. Angela asserted that, the DSB will also advise
ministers on delivery of Open Data from the Public Data Group as well as the provision of data
and services to the general public to ensure access to data is being made easier for all users.
6.3
Angela asserted that the Data Strategy Board is about driving forward the strategic role of data in
supporting innovation and economic growth in both the public and commercial sectors. Angela
reaffirmed the views raised in her meeting with David and Hugh -that APPSI’s concept of an NII
is very much akin to the principles of the DSB and that there would-be value in APPSI presenting
to the DSB once the concept had been contextualized.
2
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/appsi/meetings-conferences-seminars.htm
ACTION: APPSI to present at future Data Strategy Board meeting once NIF paper is finalised.
Item 7: The Open Data White Paper - Simon French Head of Transparency Programme Cabinet
Office (Paper 2)
7.1
The Chairman welcomed Simon French to the meeting and said that it was pleasing to have the
curator of the White Paper3 attend to summarise it. Simon reminded members that since the
general election, the government have driven forward the agenda on transparency and has
endeavoured to be an advocate for Open Data.
7.2
Simon reminded members that the precursor for the White Paper was the government’s Making Open
Data Real Consultation that took place earlier in the year. He confirmed that they had received
close to 500 responses from a variety of sectors on a variety of different issues. Simon noted that
one recurring theme to arise from the consultation process was the cost of data. He affirmed that
governments general principle is that data should be provided free wherever appropriate and
possible, or at a fair price where it is costly for the public sector to provide it.
7.3
Simon felt that with such a variety of views being received during the consultation process it was
important for the government to have a White Paper to set out its approach on Open Data and
make transparent the policy decision.
7.4
He said that, by recently amending the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 2000, there was a
failsafe in place to ensure people are entitled to access a data set and that the changes made were
going to be reflected in the upcoming development process for the FOIA Code of Practice.
7.5 Simon explained that The White Paper consisted of essentially three chapters: 1. Enhanced Access,
2. Building Trust, and 3. Smarter Use:
1. Enhanced Access
7.6 The Cabinet Office aims to increase transparency on grant funding by publishing data on which
organisations receive public money from civil-society programmes.
7.7 The Department for Work and Pensions will release statistics on job outcomes and sustainment
payments of the Work Programme from autumn 2012.
7.8 HM Treasury will produce data relating to the management and use of European Union (EU) funds
in the United Kingdom.
7.9 The Department for Education will, for the first time, publish statistics on ‘Educational destinations’
in July 2012 showing the percentage of pupils progressing to additional learning in a school, further
education or sixth form college, an apprenticeship or a higher education institution at ages 16 and
19.
2. Building Trust
7.10 Simon confirmed that there was a real emphasis on ensuring and engraining trust with the public
through transparency. Over the last two years, the government has sought to do this through
driving the release of data from government departments, something which had been called for in
3
http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/resource-library/open-data-white-paper-unleashing-potential
the Kieron O’Hara review4.
3. Smarter Use
7.11 Simon said that the smarter use element of the White Paper is focused on breaking down the
barriers to data sharing and to shift the paradigm on to the citizen, letting them decide how they
wish to access data and share their personal information. Simon highlighted that so far almost 9000
data sets has been released on the data portal www.data.gov.uk covering health, transport, crime and
justice. Simon explained that it was a major step forward that people were now able to scrutinise
local crime statistics, sentencing rates, school results, hospital infection rates and GP outcomes.
7.12 APPSI members had an extensive discussion on the value of the data sets made available on
data.gov.uk. Michael Jennings was of the view that much of the data on data.gov was far too central
government-focused, and that efforts needed to be made on engaging with the private and public
service beyond Whitehall. Simon acknowledged that further work with arms-length bodies was
necessary.
7.13 There was a strong emphasis among members on the importance of quality of data over the quantity
being made ready for use on data.gov. The opinions of most members were that it would be more
productive for data.Gov to concentrate its efforts on ensuring meaningful and useable data, and that
there was a risk of the data.Gov becoming too cumbersome and swamped with unreliable or noncontextualised data.
7.14 APPSI members noted paragraph 1.8 of the White Paper, which sets out the government’s
commitment to setting up an independent review on the reuse of PSI and PSI Funding. Members
questioned whether there would be scope for APPSI to contribute as part of this review. Simon
confirmed that it was important to have an independent evidence-based assessment to inform the
government’s spending review, but he was not in a position at present to comment on the structure
of such a review.
7.15 Michael Nicholson said that government needs to be cautious of over committing itself to the
current transparency agenda and wondered whether the public will have the same desire for
transparency in the years ahead. Michael felt that the White Paper did not really assess what the
cost will be for Whitehall and the public sector against a definitive assessment of what transparency
will achieve.
7.16 Representative APPSI member for Scotland, Duncan Macniven, was very pleased with the direction
of travel the White Paper was going in on Open Data, but thought APPSI as a collective body
would be in a good position to advise government as part of the review on PSI.
7.17 Keith Dugmore agreed but thought it important to recognise that (following the consultation
exercise on Open Data) the government has been successful in changing the culture within
departments and that there was a clear ethos being established on proactively releasing data. The
Department for Work and Pension's survey5 was referenced as a positive example. Hugh Neffendorf
said that all members that he had spoken with felt the White Paper was a good step forward. His
main concern was that there were a lot of bodies involved and many useful initiatives mentioned
but that he could not 'see the joins' - how were the initiatives to be acted on and by who, under what
leadership?
7.18 There was however a consensus amongst most APPSI Members that there had been a lack of focus
on the role of the private sector within the Open Data / PSI narrative within government, and many
wondered whether it would be beneficial if APPSI should invite a big commercial actor on Public
4
http://digitalengagement.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/blog/2010/12/08/transparency-and-privacy-review-to-be-led-by-drkieron-o%E2%80%99hara/
5
http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/frs/FRS_new_details.pdf
Data to a future meeting to hear their views on the governments Open Data policy. It was agreed
that if a representative from a company like Google could attend, it would be beneficial to have a
senior representative of the Cabinet Office, such as the head of the Government Digital Service
Mike Bracken, to present and offer the government perspective on the role of private sector in PSI.
ACTION: Invite a senior representative of the Cabinet Office such as Mike Bracken to a future meeting.
ACTION: Invite a commercial PSI representative to meet with APPSI at a future meeting.
Item 8. Establishing a National Information Infrastructure - the next Steps, APPSI Chair David
Rhind, and Mr Hugh Neffendorf.
8.1 Hugh presented the latest draft of the concept of a National Information Infrastructure (NII), which
incorporated member’s comments on the paper since the last APPSI meeting in April. Hugh and
David Rhind noted that they wanted to use this meeting, predominantly to explore views on how to
take the work forward.
8.2 Hugh noted that the government’s plans in the White Paper form valuable building blocks for the
NII. He felt that the definition of the Data Strategy Board and its scope clearly provides an
opportunity for the DSB to become the nexus of a contemporary National Information
Infrastructure. That said, Hugh remained convinced that steps to create a National Information
Infrastructure merited much greater explicit focus. As presently defined, the Data Strategy Board,
working with others like APPSI, is the best contender to foster the NII but its Terms of Reference
need tuning to make this possible.
8.3
Members remained concerned by the term ‘infrastructure’. Some were concerned that the term was
too stark and would probably deter many within government circles, due to the perceived
substantial resources a government infrastructure might require. Most were in agreement that the
term National Information Framework (NIF) would be a better interpretation of the concept.
8.4
Philip Webb thought that the virtues of an NIF could be drawn out more in the paper. Many were
also of the view that by having concrete examples of how the NIF could be applied and improved
data accessibility would enhance buy in into the concept. In line with this, Peter Weinand thought
APPSI’s work should very much be pitched to the PSI community as a concept rather than entity
or physical structure requiring management.
8.5
The Chairman took on board the comments made by members. He felt that, given the level of
consensus around the table on the overall position of the paper, APPSI should start looking to
sound wider opinion in the PSI community of over the summer period. Ms Tullo suggested that
APPSI may wish to consider publishing their paper as a journal article and then members reference
the article in their respective blogs.
ACTION: David Rhind and Hugh Neffendorf to incorporate final comments from members to the latest
draft.
ACTION: Secretariat to circulate the final version to APPSI Members.
ACTION: David Rhind and Hugh Neffendorf & Secretariat, to explore publishing the concept as a
journal article.
ACTION: APPSI members to utilise contacts to engage with the wider PSI community in proselytising
the concept.
Item 9: APPSI updates - PSI in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
9.1 The Chairman noted that David Lammey had provided a written update see annex a.
9.2 Bill Oates summarised that great strides were being made in Wales on the back of the White Paper
with emphasis being made on Big Data. Whilst cost savings are a primary driver for the Welsh
Government, Bill said that there was progress being made on securing access agreements for further
data sets, and online mapping APIs. Duncan Macniven emphasised that the Open Data White Paper
was also having a positive effect in Scotland.
Item 10: Any Other Business
10.1 The Chairman noted that time had been set in Any Other Business to discuss the subsequent steps
and actions for APPSI to take forward; however, he felt this could be carried to the following
meeting following the next set of revisions to the NII paper.
10.2 The Chairman noted that the next meeting was due to take place at the Ministry of Justice in Petty
France on 21 September 2012.
ANNEX A
APPSI MEETING – 9 July 2012
NORTHERN IRELAND UPDATE
Met with John Dodds (Director of Innovation, BIS and Head of DSB Secretariat), and his officials along
with Bill Oates (Wales) and Ben Plouviez (Scotland) on 8 June 2012 at BIS, London, to discuss devolved
representation. There were several follow-up phone calls.
2.
The one seat shared in rotation proposal was rejected, and alternatives were discussed.
3.
The current state of play:
Content that Northern Ireland would be represented on the Data Strategy Board (DSB)
Government Officials’ Forum (GOF) rather than the DSB Board;
GOF inaugural meeting scheduled for 18 July 2012;
NI will have a bilateral (as will the other Devolved Administrations (DAs) with the DSB
chair, so that there be an opportunity to outline any specific areas of interest and concern
to the Chair at an early stage; and
BIS to carry out some initial mapping of the key areas of interest of the DAs for the
Chair's Induction pack, using material provided by the DAs as a starting point.
4.
Met with John Wilkinson, CEO, Land & Property Services (LPS), DFP, and some of his senior
officials, on 11 June 2012 to discuss Open Data issues. Outcomes:
LPS is considering my invitation to participate in any bilateral meeting with the DSB
chair; and
LPS agreed to be represented at a senior level on a NI Civil Service group established to
consider and advise on ‘Data sets and Open Government’ issues.
5.
Made contact with Helen Shilliday, Registrar of Companies for Northern Ireland, on 20 June
2012, and discussed the latest Companies House developments. She is the head of a Companies
House Information Centre in Belfast, which plays an operational role. She is aware of wider DSB
and Public Data Group developments.
EC Proposal to amend PSI Directive: PSI Officials’ Group meetings
6.
7.
Discussed matters arising from PSI Officials’ Group meeting of 25 May with Jim Wretham
(OPSI) and representatives from the other devolved administrations.
Jim Wretham, The National Archives, to update devolved administration representatives
following the 29 June meeting.
Contact with Irish government officials
8.
The earlier non-response was due to a retirement. John Foley (Training Unit, Department of
Public Expenditure & Reform) contacted me. He has responsibility for the PSI Directive, and is
currently providing assistance to the Permanent Representative of the Telecoms Council working
group in Brussels regarding the proposed amendments to the Directive.
9.
His Department has recently published (April 2012) an e-government strategy for the next three
years: 'eGovernment 2012-2015' sets out priorities for implementing citizen-focused e-
government, including location-aware services; opening up government data for re-use through
publication in machine-readable formats; and designing new services or redesigning existing ones
for mobile devices.
10.
There are a number of Irish PSI websites worth noting:
http://www.psi.gov.ie – main Irish government PSI portal
http://www.dublinked.ie/ – Dublin region Local Authorities initiative
http://data.fingal.ie/ – Fingal County Council
http://opendata.ie/ – Information about the Irish Republic that is published on the web, under an
open licence and in a machine-readable format.
http://www.dublinked.ie/?q=opendatairelandbriefingpaper - Open Data Ireland Report by the
National Cross Industry Working Group (February 2012). It makes numerous recommendations;
two are particularly noteworthy:
1. That a (single) Minister is appointed with specific responsibility for Open Data.
2. That a clear and time bound strategy be developed, including project plan and project manager
with reporting responsibility to the Minister.