ePSIplus Thematic Network: Towards the 2008 review Chris Corbin ePSIplus Analyst Oxford, UK, 12 th November 2007 UK Advisory Panel on Public Sector Information Annual seminar: Taking Public Sector Information Seriously funded by eContentPlus

ePSIplus - Presentation structure 1.Brief overview of the ePSIplus Thematic Network 2.How ePSIplus supports the EC review of Directive 2003/98 3.Europe - PSI Directive implementation status report (12 November 2007) 4.The way forward 5.Summary & conclusions

1: ePSIplus - Purpose The ePSIplus Thematic Network: –Supports the implementation of the European Directive on PSI re-use. –Facilitates the major opportunities for business to develop value added products and services based on PSI. –The network will be active for 30 months*. –Cover all Member (EU, EEA, EFTA) and candidate states. –Covers all PSI domains. –Will focus on five major themes. * Commenced on the 1 st September 2006 and will be operational through to 28 th February (which covers the period leading up to the PSI Directive review in 2008 by the European Parliament.) Has now been operational for 14 months and during that time has established network links with Australia, Canada, Southeast Asia and the OECD. That is the topic is a global one not just European or national. The unpaid network Champions.

1: ePSIplus - Major themes 1. Legal and regulatory progress and impact (including implementation of the Directive) 2. Public sector organisation and culture change (including compliance with the Directive) 3. Encouraging PSI re-use business 4. The financial impact of the Directive: pricing and charging (including impact on public sector costs and budget) 5. Information management, standards and data quality

1: ePSIplus - Meetings - Thematic priorities 1Network kick off meeting held in Prague, 30/31 October Thematic cross-border meetings (3 per thematic area) –Legal & Regulation theme Meeting 1: 16 February 2007, Hague, Netherlands (Report published) Meeting 2: September 2007, Paphos, Cyprus Meeting 3: Slovenia –Public Sector Organisation theme Meeting 1: 11 April 2007, Prague, Czech Republic (Report published) Meeting 2: 8 October 2007, Bratislava, Republic of Slovakia Meeting 3: ? –Encouraging PSI re-use business theme Meeting 1: 31 August 2007, Copenhagen, Denmark Meeting 2: 19 October 2007, Brussels, Belgium Meeting 3: ? –Pricing impact theme Meeting 1: April 2007, Helsinki, Finland (Report published) Meeting 2: November 2007, London, UK Meeting 3: April 2008, To be arranged –Standards theme Meeting 1: 5 July 2007, London, UK (Report published) Meeting 2: November 2007, Riga, Latvia Meeting 3: Italy All the materials from the meetings are available on the ePSIplus web site Red - means the meeting has taken place or is taking place

1: ePSIplus - Meetings - National 35 National, Federal and Cross-border meetings –Cyprus 20 February 2007 (Report published) –France 14 June 2007 (Report published) –Iceland 5 September 2007 –Netherlands 27 September 2007 –Finland 2 October 2007 –Ireland 25 October 2007 –UK 30 October 2007 –Slovenia 7 November 2007 –Hungary 21 November 2007 –Germany 6 December 2007 –Belgium 11 December 2007 –Czech Republic 23 January 2008 –Latvia 25 January 2008 –Malta 8 February 2008 –Austria 20 February 2008 Final Conference (May 2008, Brussels) All the materials from the meetings are available on the ePSIplus web site Red - means the meeting has taken place or is taking place Accumulative attendance: 386

Sampling experiences (gathering evidence) Considering Comparing Concluding 1.Draft 2.QA 3.Publish The meeting Setting the scene Meeting report 85 Presentations 303 experts ePSIplus - One stop shop to PSI The evidence base (web site) Assigned ePSIplus Analyst Experts that attended meeting 1. ePSIplus Meetings: The process Thematic meetings completed: 9 out of 15 Accumulative Total National meetings completed: 8 out of experts Accumulative Total Assigned ePSIplus Analyst 63 Presentations Combined accumulative total: presentations experts attended meetings - By end of project estimate 2600

1: ePSIplus knowledge cycle Thematic agenda Thematic meeting National agendas Analytic updates on themes National meetings National issue updates

1: ePSIplus - Publications - Quarterly update Quarterly Update (Newsletter) available on the ePSIplus web site

1: ePSIplus - The One Stop Shop to PSI Live: Objective: To become the first port of call for information on PSI re-use Home page Total number of news items posted: 525

1: ePSIplus - Encouraging PSI re-use business Current categories Aeronautics (2) Companies & Finances (3) Energy (3) Land & Property (1) Law & Regulation (4) Public tenders (2) Traffic & Transport (5) Weather & Environment (6) Target 150 products

1: ePSIplus - Summary Assess and report on the impact of the Re-use PSI Directive. Demonstrate (through the network) the improved understanding of re-use of PSI across Europe Report and propose recommendations for the PSI Directive Review.

Web Site Quarterly newsletter Thematic Reports Country Reports Conference Report Final Conclusions & recommendations PSI Industry Action Group Terms of Reference Management documents Objectiv e & Aims StrategyMembership Information gathering and analysis Desk Research Surveys & questionnaires Analysis Information exchange and Consensus Building Thematic Meetings (3 Meetings for each of 5 themes) (15 off) Country meetings (25 off) Federal (Regional) Meetings (10 off) Final Conference Star t End Project Management, Monitoring internal indictors, assessment, and reporting Reports S1: ePSIplus overview

How ePSIplus supports the EC review of Directive 2003/98 Presentation section 2 funded by eContentPlus

EU PSI Directive ( broad) Political Review Member States comply PSI directive came into force Started in 1987 may achieve its objectives by 2017: 30 Years! We are here! EC Info Soc monitoring via contracts and projects such as ePSIplus Estimate as to when all EU27 will have Transposed the PSI Directive ePSIplus ePSINet + ePSINetCee MEPSIR 2: ePSIplus supports EC Directive 2006/111/EC

2: ePSIplus and the PSI Directive review EU Elections May 2009 Purpose of Review: Has the Directive 2003/98 had the desired impact? July 2007 Jan 2008 April 2008 July 2008 Oct 2008 Jan 2009 EC Online Consultation Geographic Information sector study ePSIplus & EC Conference Legal sector study Meteorological sector study EC Commissioned Sector studies EC Analysis of Consultation EC Communication European Parliament European Commission European Council EU Co-decision process Summer Recess Annual Review of Lisbon Strategy Annual Review of Lisbon Strategy Contract Awarded Report: Political statement? ePSIplus thematic network (active) ePSIplus EP Day European PSI Association

Europe - PSI Directive implementation status report (As at 12 November 2007) Presentation section 3 funded by eContentPlus

3: The European Union Million people Multi-lingual (23+ Languages) Multi-cultural 900,000+ public sector organisation’s (Employs 50+ million people) 25 million SME’s (Employs 75+ million people) Euro Zone (2007)

3: PSI re-use diagrammatic perspective Private Value Added Information providers Sector (for example real time road data) Level 1 Member State level Level 2 Regional, Provincial level Level 3 Local level Level 1 Member State level Level 2 Regional, Provincial level Level 3 Local level European Union Level 0 Public Sector Consumers (Customers) Civil Citizens, Education, Research, Voluntary Society Representative organisations Value Chain

Status as at 12 th November : Establishing the PSI framework YearMSTransposed Total2724 EFTA Grand Total3125 Current prediction: January July

EU27: Member States notified European Commission that they have completed the transposition (10) Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Ireland, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, UK (10) (12) Hungary, Lithuania (2) (17) Czech Republic, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Netherlands (5) (19) Cyprus, Malta (2) (20) Germany (1) (21) Romania (1) (23) Austria, Bulgaria (2) (24) Portugal (1) EU27: Member States still to complete transposition Belgium, Luxembourg, Spain (3) EFTA : Iceland Liechtenstein - Norway - Revised FOI Act 2006 enables Norway to comply with the PSI Directive as of Switzerland - 3: Member States transposed

3: Establishing the PSI framework NumberPercentage 28 months

EU Co-Decision Process Re-use PSI Months Member States Transposition 18 Months EU27 = 46+ Months months Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Member State Public Sector compliance Stage 4 Impact on Current PSI re-users Compliance Time to Reach Critical Mass European Parliament, Commission, Council Review July : Establishing the PSI framework

3:PSI Directive Transposition process (Open loop) Directive 2003/98/EC Sensor: The Re-user (PSI) Harmonisation achieved through: EU reviews, Complaints, Court Cases Member State 27 Member State 3 Member State 2 Member State 1 27+(1*x)….+(1*y) Variants of the Directive The diffusion effect Issues: 1.Methods of reducing variance. 2.Lack of EU enforcement. EUMSFederal (x) Cause The democratic process lag! The harmonisation process lag! Local (y) Public Body 1+z Public Body 1

3: Establishing the PSI framework

3: Establishing the PSI framework

3: Establishing the PSI framework

3: ePSIplus - Scorecard Maximum score for Legal Theme is 20

Support Transposition Implementation Awareness Enforcement ePSIplus Scorecard Theme 1 3: ePSIplus scorecard

3: ePSIplus scorecard - l inguistic references DIRECTIVE 2003/98/EC DIRECTIVA 2003/98/CE DIREKTIV 2003/98/EF DIREKTIV 2003/98/EG Direktīva 2003/98/EK DIREKTIIV 2003/98/EÜ DIRETTIVA 2003/98/CE Direttiva 2003/98/KE ΟΔΗΓΙΑ 2003/98/ΕΚ RÁDSINS 2003/98/EB RICHTLIJN 2003/98/EG RICHTLINIE 2003/98/EG Smernica 2003/98/ES

3: Public Sector Information Total set of public sector data held by the public sector Public sector data produced as part of the public task Legal basis: Data Privacy (Directive 95/46/EC & 2002/77/EC) Database protection (Directive 96/9/EC) Access to environmental information (Directive 2003/4/EC) Re-use of PSI (Directive 2003/98/EC - MS Compliant ) Intellectual Property Rights (Directive 2004/48/EC - MS compliant by ) Public procurement (Directive 2004/18/EC - MS Compliant ) INSPIRE (Directive 2007/2/EC - MS Compliant ) EU Treaty Article’s 81 & 82 In the wings! eGovernment (COM/2003/0406 & COM/2004/0219) Held by over a million public organisations within the EU and used by over 50+ million public sector employees! There is no Data Access framework in place at the EU level. Within Members States the access to data and information is often based on the Freedom of Information laws where they exist. Few laws but the application of them within the public sector is as diverse as the EU populations DNA, fingerprints or images of the iris of the eye!

3: PSI Directive legal relationships Issues - How are these Directives regulated and by whom? - Is the regulation consistent and seamless? Directive 95/46/EC Directive 2003/98/EC Directive 2007/2/EC population and housing censuses ? Data Annexes A-I 1, 2, 4, 5 A-III.1, 2, 10 Article 2.5 Article 2.1 Directive 2003/4/EC Privacy FOI Environment PSI Re-use INSPIRE Article 13.3 Article All Directives listed appertain: - to data either access too or use of; - to all parts of society

Political Review UK Transposed PSI directive came into force ePSIplus CUPI Report 3: UK timeline PoI Report Govt. Responds To CUPI & PoI HMT Study Public Sector lag: Between 15 to 20 years

Presentation - section 4 Possible ways forward to meet PSI Vision (Objective) funded by eContentPlus

4: PSI Directive - the way forward Principle 1 Directive 2003/98 is the minimum level of harmonisation. Member States may if they wish go beyond the requirements of the Directive. There is evidence that a number of Member States have gone beyond the requirements of the Directive and a number are now moving to do so in the area of charging. These tend to be the smaller Member States.

4: PSI Directive - the way forward Objective 1 To support any recommendations for improving the implementation and enforcement of the framework requires evidence. The ePSIplus Thematic Network is one source of such evidence but there are other sources. Once collated the evidence needs to be categorised as to whether the evidence is only from one Member State or is similar across a number of Member States. Where the evidence indicates a problem exists is there evidence that demonstrates that this is not the case else where? Are there examples of good practice - within Europe and globally? Is the good practice portable? Objective 2 If the evidence shows that some form of action is needed to improve the implementation and enforcement of the framework, then any recommendation for action needs to: Improve the implementation and enforcement of the framework in the shortest time frame possible. Be at the appropriate level. E.g. European Union, Member State or below.

4: PSI Directive - the way forward Consideration 1 Deciding whether to amend a Directive the following maybe taken into account, which would include amongst others: 1.The cost benefit analysis. The cost of taking an amended Directive through the co-decision process now that there are 27 EU Member States is high. 2.European elections will occur in 2009, in the final months there is pressure for European Parliamentary time. Is the amended Directive likely to gain a slot and would it move to a safe position prior to the election process starting? 3.Is there is a risk that certain Member States would lobby hard and either kill the Directive or considerably reduce the base level of the framework outlined in the Directive? For example the INSPIRE Directive 2007/2/EC that was finally agreed in November 2006 following reconciliation. The other example is Directive 2003/4/EC - the revision of the Freedom of Access to Environmental Information that was revised came out of the co-decision process weaker than when it went in to the co-decision process. 4.Have all Member States transposed and implemented the Directive effectively? For example Germany and a number of other countries have poorly implemented the Directive. 5.Have Member States nominated a public sector body to lead and take responsibility for implementing the Directive effectively? The UK OPSI is unique in the EU at the current time. 6.Are the regulators enforcing the current Directive framework?

4: PSI Directive - the way forward Consideration 2 If the evidence indicates that the issue appertains to the majority of Member State’s and it definitely impedes the development of cross border business built on PSI re- use, is it due to: the Directive itself? or the practical issue of implementation? For example PSI Asset registers are missing all across Europe should the Directive be changed to make the implementation mandatory? The answer is probably NO as other initiatives may resolve or assist, for example: eGovernment (seamless government); INSPIRE; work being undertaken by public and private bodies to address the issue which may lead to a solution.

4: PSI Directive - early indicators for consideration Implementation: - Very poor across Europe as a whole - little political or public sector commitment - Member States resource allocation is low - Regulation across Europe as a whole is almost non existent - Where regulation exists decisions are not always enforced - The spirit of the PSI Directive is not evident - approach often one of denial or resistance - partly a cultural issue but also due to competition between public and private bodies with public using dominant position. - In some Member States public sector raising legal challenges over Authority of regulator - Member State competition authorities have been so far slow to react and take action - Member State Data Protection (Privacy) Information Commissioners decisions not harmonised. - Task of compliance left to the Re-user of PSI! - The value chain is complex and is not simply public sector upstream everyone else down stream.

3: ePSIplus Theme: Impact on prices and charges Standard Annual Report (Financial) All Public Sector Annual Report Public Body x Annual Report Public Body 3 Annual Report Public Body 2 Annual Report Public Body 1 Annual Report 1+x Variants of the Standard Annual Report Example of issues: The structure of the public sector Enforcement Transparency Information loss Scaling problem Level playing field between Public and private reporting The diffusion effect Set (Reviewed) annually by Ministry of Finance Similar processes: Internally within an organisation Within Private Sector Private Sector Company Group EU legislation best practice for Company Groups operating in EU Question: Why are Public Bodies Accounts Commercial in confidence?

3: ePSIplus Theme: Impact on prices and charges Policy (Financial) PSI Re-user Public Sector Information Holder Effective policy: Open loop or closed loop? Feedback Process Regulator?

Presentation - section 5 Summary funded by eContentPlus

5: The Directive Public Sector PSIH’s PSI Framework PSI Re-users CONFIDENCE FRAMEWORK FOR THE RE-USER COST EFFECTIVE FOR THE PUBLIC SECTOR Boosts the knowledge economy

PSI FrameworkPublic Sector PSIH PSI Re-user Central PSI portalCan be referred to minimal resources Speed Understanding Standard LicenceNo negotiatingConsistency Speed Online click use standard licenceMinimal human interventionSpeed No chargeNo transaction costsSimple Marginal cost- pre-publishedMinimal transaction Costs Quick Simple Charges pre-publishedNo negotiating Consistency Understanding Easy to assess Asset ListsConsistent with good data management Easy to locate Exclusive arrangements declared and/or phased out. (by December 2008) No negotiatingEasy to understand Separate accounts between Public Task and Trading task Improved business management Easy to understand IPR Management (preferably waive IPR)Cost effective data management Simple One public sector data regimeSimple Manage requests just as in FOI RegimeMinimal human interventionFast and simple 5: PSI Directive - the WIN WIN framework The key to success is to KEEP IT SIMPLE! Keep in mind the demographic change in society: simplification is one of the options

5: Summary The PSI Directive framework was established to: - minimise the burden on the public sector of enabling the re-use of public sector information to occur without resources being diverted from the public task. (apart from the establishment resource costs) - provides confidence to the potential re-user in that it provides a balance between the public sector defacto monopoly and the micro and small enterprises. - is simple and easy so that it encourages micro and small enterprises to re-use PSI. - time is of the essence - allows innovation to occur The ePSIplus scorecard states it well: Europe so far has not met the objective, but there are now signs of movement towards the objective

5: PSI Directive - summary Transposition: - Is taking a long time and harmonisation even longer - The purpose of the Directive has been misinterpreted in some Member States (considered to be an access law rather than an economic framework) - Member State lead bodies often do not understand their responsibility (they see their task as a narrow one of transposition and not more) - There is clear a need for action - at the current time the action appears to be moving towards a form of Good Practice that should be followed by all Member States and to back this up by the European Commission using the powers that they have to encourage Member States to comply. The EU wide action to be combined with action within Member States to address the issues appertaining to their country.

Is the EU PSI Directive in Europe as at 12 November 2007? Entrepreneurial positive (it has encouraged innovation and entry into the market) Entrepreneurial neutral (it has not stimulated innovation and entry into the market) Entrepreneurial negative (it has discouraged innovation and entry into the market) 5: Summary On balance currently here as at

Interested in PSI? Then why not visit: Thank you for your attention funded by eContentPlus