The Government’s Performance and Innovation Unit (PIU) yesterday
released a report on the sharing of personal information among
government departments, an essential step in the move towards
e-governance. In effect, it enables departments to talk to each
other. However, the report has already been criticised by a privacy
group.
Entitled “Privacy and Data-Sharing: The Way Forward for Public
Services”, the PIU report says that action is needed in a number of
areas, including:
- Building public trust: ensuring clear and consistent principles
govern the way personal information is used across the public
sector, and improved access to personal data along with simple
processes for correcting mistakes;
- Improving data quality: ensuring that the data held for public
service delivery is high quality and up-to-date, for example
through increased use of data quality audits;
- Making better use of technology to deliver more secure, more
joined-up services: ensuring high levels of data security,
effective protection from fraud and more joined-up, more
personalised service delivery, for example through the use of
smartcard and Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) technology and by
implementing best practice on information security throughout the
public sector; and
- Addressing legal problems: ensuring that public services are
clear about how the law regulates data-sharing, together with
consultation on possible legal changes to allow wider data-sharing
with the consent of the individual and to change the processes for
establishing data-sharing gateways.
Shortly after yesterday’s publication, the Foundation for
Information Policy Research (FIPR) described the 200-page report as
“deeply disappointing.” The independent organisation that exists to
study the interaction between information technology and society,
criticised the length of time taken in preparing the report.
The FIPR claimed that the adoption of the new culture and the
technical infrastructure on which the plans will need to be based
will be “far too late” to meet the “e-government” target of
2005.
It also criticised the plan for some data sharing to take place
without an individual’s consent being introduced by secondary
legislation:
“Legislation is clearly needed for people’s
privacy to be overridden in this way – but the PIU merely proposes
the use of Regulations, where Parliament will be unable to amend
the proposals if indeed they are ever debated at all.”
Finally, the FIPR criticises the intention that the Chief
Knowledge Officer in each department will be the person responsible
for both protecting the data and disclosing it.
