Lots of bugs in Open Data Corp plans - Socitm

Local government ICT leadership group Socitm has highlighted what it sees as "a series of issues" with the Coalition's Open Data proposals it claims are likely to "inhibit delivery of the promise of open data to improve public service delivery and benefit the public".

It's responding to the just-closed Making Open Data Real: A Public Consultation and Data policy for a Public Data Corporation consultation process. 

Socitm believes recent official Open Data statements over-emphasise benefits to armchair auditors and developers; by contrast, it thinks Open Data will primarily benefit public service delivery, as managers are able to access and share more and better information produced by their own organisations and other public services.

This would be aided by gradual adoption of common data standards across local authorities and other public services.

Plus, it argues, Open Data issues need to be treated within a broader approach to information management and evidence-based decision-making so that "the process of managing data and ensuring useful data is properly captured and readily available in a timely fashion to decision-makers" is given higher priority than at present.

Individual local authorities struggle with the business case for publishing Open Data, it's also claiming. The argument that open data publishing will, for example, lead to savings on handling Freedom of Information requests seems right, but real evidence of this is not readily available, it warns.

With regard to the governance of open data set out in Data policy for a Public Data Corporation, Socitm believes that the 'given' of a Public Data Corporation managing the availability of 'charged for' public data is at odds with the proposals contained making Open Data real - and appears to be at variance with aspirations, like the Big Society and transparency agenda.

Indeed, it believes that Data policy for a Public Data Corporation appears to be driven by the interests of institutions such as HM Land Registry, Ordnance Survey and Meteorological Office and potential private investors, all of whom have a particular interest in controlling and charging for public data, rather than by the interests of potential data users, it warns.

"While streamlining data prices and licenses may be an improvement for commercial organisations dealing with trading funds, this has little to do with Open Data," it told government in its response.

"The proposed 'Right to Data' is presented largely in terms of charged for data, and does not consider the relative economic merits of charging versus a free Open Data model, and value added data services would continue to be developed and sold as now... The Freemium option and other vague commitments to increase access to public data introduced in the consultation are unconvincing."

"The status quo is unsatisfactory, and although we reject the creation of a Public Data Corporation as conceived in the consultation paper, this should not be an excuse for another decade of trading funds and closed data," warned Martin Ferguson, the body's Head of Policy.

"Reform is necessary, but not this way. A proper debate on the need for, and constitution of a Public Data Corporation is needed."