The new policy announcement on procuring Open Source is a very positive forward step. If I may suggest a next step, it would be to identify the usage of Open Source in UK Gov, and consolidate. Where we are using Open Source, we should attempt to engage positively with the development and support communities. As an example of what I mean, some years ago, the eEnvoy sponsored development of a web content platform, DotP, with the intention of a wide government roll out. For various reasons it didn’t happen, but one can envisage a very different approach today –
- Identify suitable Open Source base CMS platform(s)
- Where commercial support exists, sign-up for a cross-government deal
- Certify suitable development and hosting partners
- Publicise availability of the supported platforms within government and encourage take-up
- Build communities of developer and support expertise within government
- Contribute financial support to the development community
- Where government extends or develops on the base platform, release this back into the community
In other words, don’t just use the software but actively engage with the community

So I have used DVLA and car MOT this year because it saved me a trip to the Post Office , but not one other government on-line service. If the HMRC says its web site is not secure enugh for the “rich” why should I use it ?

We need some respect by government for its citizens, who did indeed vote it in, or for another party. In the Netherlands this relationship is led by Matt Poelmans, Director of the Citizenlink – an initiative of the Dutch Government to improve the performance of the public sector by involving citizens.

Please ask one of your civil service Grade 3′s to go to The Hague and bring back his methods ( summarised below )

1. Choice of Channel – As a citizen I can choose for myself in which way to interact with government. Government ensures multi channel service delivery, i.e. the availability of all communication channels: counter, letter, phone, e-mail, internet.
2. Transparent Public Sector – As a citizen I know where to apply for official information and public services. Government guaranties [sic] one-stop-shop service delivery and acts as one seamless entity with no wrong doors.
3. Overview of Rights and Duties – As a citizen I know which services I am entitled to under which conditions. Government ensures that my rights and duties are at all times transparent.
4. Personalised Information – As a citizen I am entitled to information that is complete, up to date and consistent. Government supplies appropriate information tailored to my needs.
5. Convenient Services – As a citizen I can choose to provide personal data once and to be served in a proactive way. Government makes clear what records it keeps about me and does not use data without my consent.
6. Comprehensive Procedures – As a citizen I can easily get to know how government works and monitor progress. Government keeps me informed of procedures I am involved in by way of tracking and tracing.
7. Trust and Reliability – As a citizen I presume government to be electronically competent. Government guarantees secure identity management and reliable storage of electronic documents.
8. Considerate Administration – As a citizen I can file ideas for improvement and lodge complaints. Government compensates for mistakes and uses feedback information to improve its products and procedures.
9. Accountability and Benchmarking – As a citizen I am able to compare, check and measure government outcome. Government actively supplies benchmark information about its performance.
10. Involvement and Empowerment – As a citizen I am invited to participate in decision-making and to promote my interests. Government supports empowerment and ensures that the necessary information and instruments are available.

Some concrete suggestions are

1) Make sure data is ‘pulled’ to where it is needed, not ‘pushed’ to where it might be needed.

2) Make sure that secondary users (policy makers, administrators, planners) only see aggregated data, not individual records. Only users dealing with the individual should see data that identifies the individual.

3) Oversee a change in culture so that data users know that they have a huge responsibility, particularly with respect to sensitive data. Lending access tokens, sending data on disks through the post and leaving unencrypted data on laptops should be as frowned upon as lighting up indoors has become!

If you can do this you’ll have done a great service. (declaration of interest – I’m working for the academic partners on the CfH data quality evaluation project – I’d be happy for you to get in touch)

Two suggestions:

1. Speak out on national IT projects that are meant to centralize and standardize data. The truth is that they always go over budget, over time, don’t actually do what they are supposed to, and basically jsut end up wasting money. Whenever anyone says “wouldn’t it be great if we had a single system for managing all fire stations / ambulances / hospitals / etc everywhere?” I recommend that you take the nearest biro and stab them repeatedly in the eye with it until they shut up.

2. (And this is going to sound harsh) resign. If you can’t figure out how to write a simple requests website, then I’m worried that you don’t know enough about technology to be responsible for it.