Transcript Locus Presentation for NHS IC Oct 09

Challenges facing Public
Sector Information Re-Users
Audrey Mandela
Locus Chair
October 2009
The Locus Association
•
•
•
The Locus Association was established to encourage the public sector to
maintain a trading environment that is fair and equitable, in particular in
relation to the licensing and re-use of public sector information.
We do not necessarily believe that data should be free; however, we
believe data should generally be available at cost plus a small margin.
Our members are private sector companies that are committed to working
with PSI holders to maintain and develop a vibrant, information-driven UK
economy that ultimately works to the benefit of the public sector, private
sector and end consumer.
Public Sector Information (PSI) matters
“Public authorities produce, collect and hold vast amounts of public sector
information. PSI is considered to be the single largest source of information in
Europe, covering widely diverging sectors and expanding across all areas of
government.” (European Commission)
“Between 15% and 25% of commercial information products and services are
based on information held by the public sector.” (Lord Falconer, former Secretary
of State for Constitutional Affairs and Lord Chancellor)
“Government is a natural monopolist for most PSI.” (Treasury Spending Review)
The MEPSIR study (2006) contracted by the European Commission puts the
overall market size for the re-use of PSI in the European Union at EU27 billion.
Over £500 million of lost value to the economy because of current arrangements.
(OFT Commercial Use of Public Information Market Study)
Challenges for PSI Re-users
• Legislation: Directives and legislation are not clear, and are
lightweight.
• Regulation: Lack of robust regulation/regulators.
• Public task: Lack of clarity regarding Public Sector Information
Holders’ (PSIHs) “public task”, i.e. what public organisations are
allowed to do/are meant to do.
• Pricing: should pricing be set to encourage re-use, or to make a
profit for Government?
• Licensing: there are often restrictive or confusing rules.
• Information: lack of information about what data is available, from
which entity.
EU PSI Regulations
•
•
•
•
The Re-use of Public Sector Information Regulations 200518 (the Re- use
Regulations) implement the European Directive of 2003 (the Re-use
Directive).
While PSIHs are not obliged to make information available for re-use, and
some types of PSIHs fall outside their remit, the Re-use Regulations
encourage the wide distribution of PSI.
They also set out what is considered PSI for the purpose of the Re-use
Regulations, what PSIHs can charge for information and the fair terms on
which access should be given. In addition, the Re-use Regulations require
that PSIHs have an internal complaints procedure. In the UK, where
complaints are not resolved under this process, complainants can refer their
complaint to the OPSI, the body that regulates the PSI sector.
The Re-use of Public Sector Information Regulations also state that any
charge for re-use must not exceed the sum of the cost of collection and a
reasonable rate of return on investment.
The PSI Directive does not apply to…
1.2 a) Documents the supply of which is an activity falling outside the scope
of the public task of the public sector bodies concerned as defined by law
or by other binding rules in the Member State, or …… in line with common
administrative practice….
The PSI Regulations in the UK as
transposed from the Directive state….
Regulation 15(2) public sector organisations can charge sums for
the re-use that should not exceed:
a) The cost of collection, production, reproduction and dissemination
of information; and
b) A reasonable return on investment.
Office of Public Sector Information
(OPSI)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Merged with the National Archives in October 2006 “to provide strong and coherent
leadership for the development of information policy across government and the
wider public sector”.
Regulator of public sector information holders for their information trading activities.
The Information Fair Trader Scheme (IFTS) founded on the principles of openness,
transparency, fairness, compliance and challenge helps re-users of public sector
information to know that they will be treated reasonably and fairly.
OPSI also investigates complaints against public sector information holders made
under the Re-use of Public Sector Information Regulations.
OPSI provides the Click-Use system for obtaining a licence to re-use Crown copyright
and public sector material through an online licensing process and is responsible for
the Information Asset Register (IAR) that lists information assets held by the UK
Government with a focus on unpublished material.
OPSI also provides a secretariat to the Advisory Panel on Public Sector Information
(APPSI), which advises Ministers on how best to encourage the re-use of public
sector information.
Advisory Panel on Public Sector
Information (APPSI)
•
A Non-Departmental Public Body of the Ministry of Justice
Its role is:
• To advise Ministers on how to encourage and create opportunities in the
information industry for greater re-use of public sector information;
• To advise the Director of the Office of Public Sector Information and
Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office about changes and
opportunities in the information industry, so that the licensing of Crown
copyright and public sector information is aligned with current and emerging
developments;
• To review and consider complaints under the Re-use of Public Sector
Information Regulations 2005 and advise on the impact of the complaints
procedures under those regulations.
UK Government PSI policy has
been problematic for many years
•
Government gives away some data… (the Re-use of Public Sector Information
Regulations 2005, the Freedom of Information Act 2000, the Environmental
Information Regulations 2004 and the Transformational Government initiative aim
to make as much PSI available as widely and cheaply as possible)…
•
And sells some data… (Trading Funds are required to hit revenue targets; the
Wider Markets Initiative encourages PSIHs to earn an income from selling or
licensing PSI).
•
Tim Berners-Lee has been drafted in to help Gordon Brown achieve his aim of
making the UK a world leader in opening up government information on the
internet (an important element of “Building Britain’s Future”).
•
OFT CUPI study: “We are concerned about the lack of clarity around the
objectives of government policy for PSI…. PSIHs themselves have told us that
they feel subject to conflicting policies.”
Various studies & legislation have
identified/sought to address key issues
•
•
•
•
•
•
2000: HM Treasury's (HMT) Cross-cutting Review of the Knowledge
Economy (Review of Government Information)
2003/5: European Union Re-use of Public Sector Information Regulations
2005/2006: Office of Fair Trading Commercial Use of Public Information
(CUPI) report
2007: Cabinet Office Power of Information Taskforce Report
2008: “Cambridge Study”
2009: Trading Funds Assessment/Operational Efficiency Programme
OFT Commercial Use of Public
Information Study
• Launched in July 2005 and published in December 2006.
• Aimed to examine whether the way in which PSIHs supply information works
well for businesses, to the best advantage for consumers.
• Focused on central government PSIHs, particularly the 400 bodies with an
annual expenditure of £500,000 or more.
• “We have concluded that improvements can be made. We estimate that, with
these improvements, the sector could double in terms of the value it contributes
to the UK economy to a figure of £1 billion annually.”
• PSIHs need to ensure:
• that businesses have access to PSI at the earliest point in its refinement that it is useful to them
and on an equal basis to any refined information operations of the PSIH itself
• where PSIHs are engaged in significant refined activities they need to ensure that they are not
favouring their own refined operations over the private sector. This requires the use of costreflective pricing and accounting separation of PSIHs' unrefined and refined operations.
The Cambridge Study
•
•
•
•
•
Commissioned jointly by the Department for Business, Enterprise and
Regulatory Reform (BERR) and HM Treasury in July 2007; published
February 2008.
Examined the cost and benefits for society, and the effects on government
revenue, of 4 different models for the provision of public sector information by
trading funds.
Focused on the six largest trading funds by data provision revenue: the Met
Office, Ordnance Survey, the UK Hydrographic Office, the Land Registry,
Companies House and the Driver Vehicle Licensing Agency.
The study found that “in most cases, a marginal cost regime would be welfare
improving”.
Having proper governance/regulatory regime in place is central to
realising the benefits of change: “…getting this right should be one of the
first items for consideration whether or not any restructuring does take place
(and will be essential if additional subsidies are required under a move to
marginal cost pricing).”
The Operational Efficiency
Programme
•
•
•
“In the current economic circumstances businesses are facing up to real challenges of
cutting costs in order to stay in business and emerge stronger from the downturn. The
public sector needs to do likewise, looking for savings in addition to the routine savings
departments are expected to make each year, so that the Government can continue to
invest in excellent public services while maintaining sustainable public finances.”
“…significant opportunities… remain to be seized.”
Five private and public sector leaders with relevant expertise were appointed to advise
the Operational Efficiency Programme and examine five key areas of operational
expenditure in the public sector:
–
–
–
–
–
•
back office operations and IT, led by Dr Martin Read;
collaborative procurement, led by Martin Jay;
asset management and sales, led by Gerry Grimstone;
property, led by Lord Carter of Coles; and
local incentives and empowerment, led by Sir Michael Bichard.
“Gerry Grimstone has recommended a stronger mechanism of challenge across
government to ensure that assets held by the public sector are managed in a way that
maximises efficiency, and that commercial potential is being fully considered and
harnessed.”
The OEP & Public Sector Information
•
The original objective: “In response to the Budget 2008 announcements that the
Government would link an assessment of the governance, business plans and
future development strategies of the trading funds with a commitment to look
closely at public sector information held by trading funds to distinguish more
clearly what is required by Government for public tasks and ensure that this
information is made available as widely as possible for use in downstream
markets.”
•
“The Assessment identified key principles of good practice relating to information
produced by all Trading Funds. These principles are:
– information easily available — where possible at low or marginal cost;
– clear and transparent pricing structures for the information, with different
parts of the business accounted for separately;
– simple and transparent licences to facilitate the re-use of information for
purposes other than that for which it was originally created; and
– clearly and independently defined —with input from customers and
stakeholders — core purposes (‘public tasks’) of the organisations.”
Impact of the credit crunch on PSI Policy
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
An increased emphasis on sweating the assets and achieving “value for
money”
Charging for data that might once have been free
Increasing fees for data that is already charged for
Selling off some assets such as Trading Funds: “…consider whether the
most efficient use is being made of the assets from the point of view of
business model, organisational and customer requirements, capital
structure, including whether the current position within the public sector is
appropriate”…
Encouraging some PSIHs to be more commercial, which may lead them to
compete with their customers
Giving away some data to try to stimulate economic growth
More studies, reviews, benchmarking, consultants, advisors…
An on-going lack of clarity / conflicting policies
PSI and the upcoming election
• Whichever party wins, there will continue to be a push to realize
greater value from Government assets.
• The Conservatives are in favour of giving away some public sector
information, but have also expressed interest in selling off some
Government assets, especially several Trading Funds.
• If Labour stays, we’ll see more of the same: sweat the assets hard,
sell some off, and allow others to compete with the commercial
sector.
• There is unlikely to be a cohesive strategy for PSI in the UK for
some time.
• Locus is planning a seminar for November to give each party the
opportunity to describe the PSI plank of its platform.
(The current and future ) Government
must decide what it wants…
To provide for needs of good government?
To maximise the use of PSI?
To be as efficient as possible?
To avoid conflict (e.g., Competition Law and OPSI)?
To encourage innovation and enterprise?
To make an appropriate financial return?
Access to Public Sector Information
has improved…
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
According to the EC’s 2009 Review of the PSI Directive, prices have
decreased, there is more transparency, some monopolies have been
broken, and fair trading conditions have been introduced.
The UK has created the Office of Public Sector Information (OPSI) to
advise on and regulate the operation of the re-use of PSI…
And established the Advisory Panel on Public Sector Information.
OPSI’s has launched its OPSI PerSpectives blog
(http://perspectives.opsi.gov.uk/), and is opening up a discussion of
marginal cost pricing;
The OEP has contributed to a drive for greater efficiency and cost reduction
among PSIHs;
There is a push for simplification of pricing and licensing;
The licensing of some PSI has been made easier through the Click-Use
Licence.
But challenges remain
for re-users of PSI…
•
•
•
•
Governance is lacking. As noted in the Cambridge Study, “…having an adequate
governance/ regulatory regime in place is absolutely central to realizing the
potential benefits from change….”
The EC Directive and PSI Regulations do not currently make it mandatory for
public sector bodies to make their information available. To maximise the value of
PSI, the UK PSI Regulations need to be amended to make re-use of information
compulsory for all public sector bodies.
The EC Directive and PSI Regulations have little power to prohibit breaches of
the EC Directive or PSI Regulations.
OPSI should be given real regulatory power; currently its sanctions are either too
weak, or too nuclear.
•
There is a lack of clarity about which Government entity is responsible for PSIHs’
activities: CLG? ShEx? OPSI? NAO? Cabinet Office? MPs?
•
A proper process is needed to define PSIHs’ public task.
•
Finding information about what PSI is available is still not as straightforward as it
should be.
…challenges remain
for re-users of PSI
•
In some sectors, the PSI holder competes with its partners/customers, and
is being encouraged to do so by Government.
•
There is still a lack of clarity, consistency and transparency in the terms of
use and pricing imposed by some PSIHs, particularly large Trading Funds
such as Ordnance Survey.
•
The commercial sector is not consistently given access to ‘unrefined’
(‘upstream’) data on the same terms as trading funds themselves have.
•
We still lack simple and cost-effective procedures of redress in the event of
complaints about non-compliance with the Directive as an initial alternative
to litigation.
The need to balance the desire to release PSI for re-use for free, or under a
different pricing structure, to benefit the economy against Government’s
need to work its assets.
Government must work harder to have a PSI policy that is truly cohesive
and consistent, and that works for all stakeholders.
•
•
THE LOCUS ASSOCIATION
36 Broadway
London SW1H 0BH
t +44 20 7340 6260
f +44 20 7340 6261
Email: [email protected]
Web: www.locusassociation.co.uk