Response to Transparency Code Consultation

As far as the Communities and Local Government proposal for local authority transparency does go, there are still questions about the type of datasets it mandates, the support it provisions for facilitating informed dialogue about data-driven democratic accountability, the standard of consistency it will drive and where it fits in an increasingly complex web of government legislation in this area.

There’s a summary and some interpretation of the Proposal in the presentation below (as well as this post), from which a lively discussion around the government’s proposal ensued at the Feb 2011 meeting of the Open Data Sheffield community:

There is a significant emphasis on cost-savings in the Proposed Code, mandating release of spending data over performance data (either internal key performance indicators or third party service level achievements). This potentially skews the open data agenda to be about aspects of public administration that are likely to raise defensive heckles or sensationalist reporting, rather than encouraging positive discussion about the effectiveness or value of public services against cost (as well as clearer exposure of the targets being pursued).

While local authorities are being charged with releasing data, there is no provision in the Code for supporting authorities to ensure that their audience is equipped with the contextual information or basic skills needed to interpret datasets or data correlations appropriately. Allowing for this will mitigate against inaccurate correlative analysis and improve data literacy to ensure that citizens can positively contribute to a data-driven democratic accountability agenda.

It’s not clear how the proposed Code will support continued engagement between data owners and citizens or developers to ensure that there is indeed an ongoing dialogue that facilitates the proactive and demand-led approach that the Code will require of local authorities. It also references responding to best practice as it develops, but there seems to be no provision for ensuring a base level of consistency across authorities (by sector or geography) for either implementing the code or sharing best practice.

There is a question about whether the salary threshold is indeed gross salary or value of total remuneration. There is also some desire to see all public office salary details published without a lower threshold, including bottom-of-the-ladder grades. This will help demonstrate across-the-board fairness in pay structures within public bodies.

The proposed Code makes no recommendation to ensure consistency in dataset indexing across local authorities and areas, which will facilitate cross-authority analysis.

It is unclear whether there are inherited licence implications for derived data and derivative works based on openly licensed public datasets.

The Code makes no mention of independent service providers in health and social care, welfare support, criminal justice, education or environmental services sectors within the list of local authorities, particularly where they have opted to operate outside the purview of the listed authorities, such as schools that are no longer operated under local authorities.

In parallel to the consultation for the proposed Code, there have been separate announcements about both the Public Data Corporation (also summarised in the following presentation) and amendments to the Protection of Freedoms Bill. A clear statement of how these different statutory proposals fit and work together is welcomed.