It’s our data, make it accessible

It’s our data, make it accessible
The Guardian, Friday 19 June 2009
By Heather Brooke

It was rather like trying to do a Google search and getting your answers delivered as a truckload of blacked-out telephone directories. The information age may have arrived some decades ago but from the format of yesterday’s publication of MPs’ expenses, Parliament is so last century.

The 700,000 pages of scanned images put online in pdf were described by Sir Stuart Bell as a ‘great achievement’ for Parliament. And I suppose it is if you’re used to inscribing your words on animal skins.

If we truly aim to be an informed electorate then we need quick, direct access to the vast troves of information held not just within Parliament but all other public bodies.

We have moved on from static documents. For information to be useful it should be dynamic, searchable, and accessible. We book our own holidays not through a travel agent but though search engines where we can compare and find the best value flights, hotels and car rentals. We no longer call up librarians with our questions but type them into Google or post them on Twitter. We can compare prices between shops and even between countries. We no longer have to rely on traditional media for our news but can graze for it across the entire globe via the internet and the postings of millions of citizen journalists.

People are used to having great swathes of information at their fingertips, yet parliament still believes it can control both the collection of information and its presentation. Officials want to lock-down documents so they can never be altered without specific written consent. You look at most government websites and the information is micro-managed to an appalling degree. There are a few exceptions – the Electoral Commission website springs to mind – but for the most part, bureaucrats and politicians are loath to allow people direct access to the raw data.

It is this loathing that lies behind officials’ reliance on the pdf document. It is a format that is fixed and static. It cannot be analysed. So we cannot, without a great deal of effort, see how many MPs are funnelling expenses into certain companies or overall food bill. This is why the Guardian set up its own crowd-sourced spreadsheet so the data could be unlocked and made useful. What that means is more taxpayers spending more of their own time and money to fix a system built badly under the instruction of the Commons officials. A better solution would have been to throw open the data from the very beginning and elicit volunteers to help in the publication.

There are no shortage of interested and skilled volunteers. Just look at the number who have helped on the Guardian’s expense website and http://whattheyclaimed.com/. Tom Steinberg and the developers at MySociety have been banging on Parliament’s door for a long time. They built the websites TheyWorkForYou and PublicWhip among others. But it’s always a struggle to get the public sector to release information. I can vouch for that.

It shouldn’t be like this. This is our data. It belongs to us. We paid for it and it was collected in our name. Isn’t it time we had access to it?

Tags:

5 Responses to “It’s our data, make it accessible”

  1. Flemingcrag says:

    Either the haphazard and e l o n g a t e d way the politicians have released their blacked out expenses is a deliberate attempt at obfuscation or this is the best the many, many expensive computer programmes sponsored by this Governmemt can deliver.

    Whichever it is, it stands as the most damning evidence of what has probably been the worst period of government in this proud Countrys’ long history.

  2. Gregory Williams says:

    The Government seems to have lost the plot. What the developers of 36Degrees and MySociety are trying to enforce is that Government serves us. The government are not elected for any other reason than to: regulate society for the good of all; legislate for the protection of all; serve society for the elevation of all; educate society for the stimulation of all. Somewhere along the last twenty years weve lost the ‘why’ – in all the privatisation of public services the focus has become the PROFIT found in the delivery of public services – not the services, or the value or the quality – and where does this profit come from? YOUR taxes! This Strategy is bleeding the value from our public services into the pensions of the board members and shareholders of these companies supplying our public services. The data discussed here is another symptom of the perspective of this government – a feudal imperious establishment that simply does not comprehend the concepts embodied in the phrase ‘To Serve’

  3. John L Bell says:

    To you and I this is ‘data’.

    In a court of law this is ‘evidence’. In terms of The Fraud Act 2006 what has been happening in parliament is fraud – a criminal act!

    Therefore concealing this information is not ‘redacting’ data, it is CONCEALING EVIDENCE of fraud and is subject to Sections 2-4 of The Fraud Act 2006 which came into force in January 2007.

    I have said this before, and will continue saying it;

    INVESTIGATE ALL MPs irrespective of party or seniority or position held!

    PROSECUTE ALL MPs who have made fraudulent claims irrespective of party or seniority or position held!

    SENTENCE ALL MPs, officials and family members who have taken part in making fraudulent claims irrespective of party or seniority or position held!

  4. Perhaps we should create a new verb.

    To ‘Terredact’; To destroy something via censorship.

    In this case Parliament.

    We could call MPs ‘Terredactists’

  5. Ian W says:

    I think John is right on the button; I don’t know why fraud charges haven’t even been given any airing to date.

    In the meantime, I smiled at an alleged voting form for the new speaker of the house. See: http://www.tomharris.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Ballot-paper.pdf

Leave a Reply