Public Sector Information – greater access involves greater responsibility
Much has been said concerning the merits of Public Sector Information (PSI), and provision of greater access. It’s hard to argue why this information should not be more readily accessible.
Indeed the Chair of the Government 2.0 Taskforce, Nicholas Gruen in a recent blog posting said “silly things which mean that data that you and I have already paid for governments to collect, data collected with the sole purpose of generating public benefits, is not simply, easily, quickly released.” And he has a point.
Even the NSW Government has recently initiated a competition apps4nsw, a new public competition to foster and promote the development of innovative digital applications and web services using public and government data relating to NSW. Some may argue this came following initial controversy by a software developer that had designed an application which allowed users to download NSW train timetables. RailCorp threatened the developer with legal action. NSW Premier Nathan Rees has since conceded, saying “We couldn’t find any reason to withhold the data, especially given that RailCorp doesn’t offer an equivalent service.”
And this is the challenge to Government. Many developers and technology companies are in a position to distribute and disseminate the data on their existing technologies be it mapping services or other applications. Thereby possibly providing a better service to citizens.
However, one area that has not received as much focus is the area of ownership, liability and responsibility.
Picture this, it’s an emergency situation say a bushfire, and a life and death decision is made based on PSI through an online mapping device. Who is responsible?, if in the unfortunate circumstance, the information is based on untimely or inaccurate information.
Many would point to the Government in the first instance, however what if that information is displayed on other companies’ technologies?
Many companies, including Microsoft and Google limit liability on the information provided on their mapping technologies. And there is sound legal reasons to do so.
However it is hard to avoid areas of ownership, liability and responsibility when working with information provided by Government.
According to the Chair of the Government 2.0 Taskforce, Nicholas Gruen, “The reason that the information has not been released is just that it’s a lot easier for a lot of people for it not to be released. Releasing it may involve legal advice and changes to copyright policy. It may involve some cost or inconvenience.”
This may be so, but factors including legal and copyright issues are important ones when considering releasing PSI - and they need to be spot on. Microsoft Australia looks forward to working with Government in making this a possibility.
Sassoon Grigorian, Manager, Government Affairs
Technorati Tags: public sector information,responsibility,nicholas gruen,government 2.0 taskforce