Thursday 30 August 2012

midata, the loneliest initiative in Whitehall – 6

On 3 November 2011, the department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) issued a press release about midata, their "exciting" plan to empower people and make the economy grow.

On or about 26 July 2012 BIS and the Cabinet Office's Behavioural Insights Team jointly issued their midata 2012 review and consultation.

Question – in the intervening 266 days, what did BIS make?

Answer – progress.

How do we know?

Because they tell us. Norman Lamb, the minister responsible, tells us on p.8 of the review that:
I am pleased to be publishing an update on progress on midata and consulting on proposals to provide it with a statutory underpinning.
Only two paragraphs later, there's been more progress:
Under Professor Shadbolt’s Chairmanship progress has been made, with businesses, consumer groups, regulators and Government agreeing core principles about data release, commissioning research into customer attitudes and beginning work on important questions about privacy and security.
It's all go. By p.11:
Progress has been made on establishing a vision and principles. We understand better the current consumer and business perceptions and the need for safeguards when consumers use their data. And we have started to see data made available.
BIS are really quite insistent, p.27:
As this review shows, there has been progress in moving midata from a concept towards reality.
It's clearly been a hectic 266 days, in some ways, for BIS and Professor Shadbolt. What with establishing the vision. And the principles.

They've had to chat with all those businesses and consumer groups and regulators and government departments. And they've had to commission research. Exhausting.

The discovery of the need for safeguards for people's privacy, and the need for security, when you're shunting personal data around must have come as a shock.

It is inevitable in this maelstrom that a few wheels fall off the initial vision. midata was meant to give us control over our own data, as well as access to it, but now control has been droppedmidata was going to be a voluntary scheme but now, perhaps at the suggestion of the Behavioural Insights Team, the idea is to legislate and make it compulsory.

The drafting of that legislation, and generally turning the midata concept into reality, will be a struggle. How will BIS force the banks, for example, to start issuing us all with statements? Professor Shadbolt may well have to hold more discussions and commission more research to crack that one.

And someone still has to come up with a reason to believe that midata would make the UK economy grow – despite all the progress already made, there's a lot of work still to be done.

Let's finish on a positive note with some incontrovertible progress made by the midata team.

Once we've all got all our transactions with every supplier we deal with safely stored in our "personal data inventory (PDI)", as BIS call it, we're supposed to be able to process the PDI in some beneficial way using applications which the market has failed so far to deliver but which, now somehow inspired by BIS, will at last appear.

What sort of applications? This question was posed to Kirstin Green at the 9 August 2012 open forum and the answer seemed a little extempore. The "midators" have obviously thought about the question since then and on 22 August 2012 the top story on the BIS news website was Next steps making midata a reality, which includes a link to A midata future: 10 ways it could shape your choices.

The reader will enjoy all the examples given, of how midata would offer otherwise unattainable benefits which empower the consumer and expand the economy. It is invidious to choose between them.

The first example of the midata future suggests that you could use your PDI to monitor the warranties on all the equipment in your house:
Instead of losing receipts and forgetting when guarantees expire, customers can use a ‘contracts and warranties dashboard’ to keep track of their purchases.
Hard to beat but somehow the tenth example is even more cogent – you can almost feel the economy expanding as you read it, this is why the state has to take order-making powers to promote midata. It's called "Going out" and it reads, in full, as follows:
midata service providers could use an individuals purchase data to look at which restaurants and bars that user like. Taking this data, they could offer you a unique service, alerting you to new or recommended restaurants that suit your taste and location.

So where your favourite restaurant has deals or offers, you could be alerted in advance to take advantage and make a booking. Combined with other services, the programme could also indicate where you could save money or improve your health by eating elsewhere, drinking less or going out less.

midata, the loneliest initiative in Whitehall – 6

On 3 November 2011, the department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) issued a press release about midata, their "exciting" plan to empower people and make the economy grow.

On or about 26 July 2012 BIS and the Cabinet Office's Behavioural Insights Team jointly issued their midata 2012 review and consultation.

Question – in the intervening 266 days, what did BIS make?

Wednesday 29 August 2012

midata, the loneliest initiative in Whitehall – 5

BIS have no communicable reason whatever
to support their contention that midata would expand the economy

Giving people access to their transaction data will cause the UK economy to grow. That is the logic behind midata according to the department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS).

It may seem obvious to you that the argument is valid. If you're a mooncalf.

But it isn't obvious to David Miller.

David Miller is an economist at BIS. He attended the 9 August 2012 open forum on midata and was asked what reason there is to believe that accessing our transaction data would result in an expanded economy.

Properly brought up, he answered truthfully: "obviously there would be costs at first, setting up midata, and running costs thereafter, and the expected competition could have the effect of driving prices down but the general feeling is that in the end the economy would grow as a result". By how much? "It's very difficult if not impossible to say what the macroeconomic effect would be."

No notes were taken and Mr Miller's words here are paraphrased but the implication is clear – they're flying blind. BIS have no communicable reason whatever to support their contention that midata would expand the economy.

midata, the loneliest initiative in Whitehall – 5

BIS have no communicable reason whatever
to support their contention that midata would expand the economy

Giving people access to their transaction data will cause the UK economy to grow. That is the logic behind midata according to the department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS).

It may seem obvious to you that the argument is valid. If you're a mooncalf.

But it isn't obvious to David Miller.

midata, the loneliest initiative in Whitehall – 4

In short, BIS want the power to force companies to do something
that they're already doing.

Some readers may by now have forgotten what the point is of midata. In their own words, with a view to empowering consumers and growing the economy, the Department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) say, in their midata consultation document (para.6, p.11):
... we are consulting on the possibility of taking an order making power. If utilised, this will compel suppliers of services and goods to provide to their customers, upon request, historic transaction data in a machine readable format.
The banks already provide us with "historic transaction data". We've had bank statements for as long as anyone can remember and they're already available on the web "in a machine readable format". The energy companies ditto. And the phone companies. And Amazon. And ...

Futile inanity
In short, BIS want the order-making power to force companies to do something that they're already doing.

They're holding a number of open forums as part of the midata consultation process. Anyone can go. It's easy. As BIS say, "... please email midata@bis.gsi.gov.uk to attend".

Anyone who can get along to the 4 and 6 September 2012 sessions may care to ask BIS what the difference is between midata and futile inanity.



Cribsheet – deregulation
By taking powers to make companies do something it may seem that midata increases the regulatory burden on UK business. Nothing could be further from the truth. As BIS tell us (para.4, p.11):
Increased data transparency and greater consumer choice will help promote innovation and competition and could also have a deregulatory effect. By giving people access to their data in a format which is machine readable it may be possible to avoid the need for some types of regulation, for example, specifying product characteristics.

midata, the loneliest initiative in Whitehall – 4

In short, BIS want the power to force companies to do something
that they're already doing.

Some readers may by now have forgotten what the point is of midata. In their own words, with a view to empowering consumers and growing the economy, the Department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) say, in their midata consultation document (para.6, p.11):
... we are consulting on the possibility of taking an order making power. If utilised, this will compel suppliers of services and goods to provide to their customers, upon request, historic transaction data in a machine readable format.
The banks already provide us with "historic transaction data". We've had bank statements for as long as anyone can remember and they're already available on the web "in a machine readable format". The energy companies ditto. And the phone companies. And Amazon. And ...

Monday 27 August 2012

Andrew Dilnot and honest political debate in the UK – 1

Time was when Sir Michael Scholar was the chairman of the UK Statistics Authority (UKSA) and he said, among other things:
“One of the reasons I took this job is that having good statistics is like having clean water and clean air. It’s the fundamental material that we depend on for an honest political debate ...”
You may want to tweak Sir Michael's point a bit. You may prefer to say that there are many fundamental materials, not just "good statistics", whatever "good" means. But if you're interested in honest political debate it's hard to gainsay him, Sir Michael is onto something.

Now he has passed the baton, and it is Andrew Dilnot who is chairman of the UKSA and who leads the Government Statistical Service and thus the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

Mr Dilnot has investigated the problem of social care for the elderly and recommended to the government that there should be a cap of £35,000 on the amount anyone is expected to pay for their care. Thereafter, the government should pay for it, he says, even if the elderly person has assets of their own, such as a house which could be sold to pay for their care.

It is impossible now in the UK to get insurance cover for social care in your old age. Mr Dilnot recently described that to the BBC as a "market failure". He's wrong, isn't he? If the market values your house at £350,000, say, then thanks to the market you can afford about 100 months in a decent old people's home. The market has not failed and Mr Dilnot is wrong to say that it has.

In the same BBC interview, Mr Dilnot describes the state stepping in and taking over the payment of your social care as you "taking control of your life". Surely it's the opposite. It's the state taking control.

The cost of implementing Mr Dilnot's £35,000 cap is estimated – very possibly by the ONS – to be £750 million p.a. That is just over one one-thousandth of current public expenditure ("one per mil" or "1‰") and so, Mr Dilnot says, his plan should be adopted as government policy.

An annual contribution of £750 million to the DMossEsq executive pension plan would also represent only about 1‰ of public expenditure. Is that a reason to make such a contribution?

It's all very well chatting about what individuals can afford but there are other questions:
  • How much can the state afford?
  • Public spending in the UK stands at about £700 billion p.a. at the moment, of which about £150 billion is borrowed. Is it sustainable to continue increasing the tax burden and the level of borrowing? How long can we go on printing money, through quantitative easing or any other technique? What happens to inflation? And interest rates? And exchange rates?
  • With our £2 trillion national debt*, aren't we supposed to be looking for ways to cut public spending, and not increase it? When do we have to confront reality?
  • If we can raise another £750 million in tax, or borrow it, why spend it on social care for the elderly who own a house? Why not eye care? Or dental care? Or subsidised taxies? Why not reduce the excise duty on tobacco?
  • Why spend the money on a problem that doesn't need solving? People just need to sell their house and then they're in funds. Why not try to solve a real problem?
  • Is social care for the elderly who can afford to pay for it themselves a legitimate matter for the state to involve itself in? If so, is there any limit to state involvement?
  • Could the budget on some other less vital public services be cut by £750 million to pay for Mr Dilnot's dream?
  • The standards of some care homes for the elderly are exemplary and in other cases the standards fall below the level we expect of a zoo. How does Mr Dilnot propose to ensure that public funds will provide dignified care and not sub-zoo care?
  • Mr Dilnot considers individuals on the one hand and the state on the other. That doesn't exhaust the cast of actors in this play. Among others, there are families in between. Are families avoiding their responsibilities? Is the problem of social care for the elderly a failure of families? What does Mr Dilnot propose to do about that?
He doesn't burden the BBC with any of these questions. Or any answers to them.

With Mr Dilnot now in charge, the water is just a little cloudier and the air just a little less Swiss – what price "honest political debate" in the UK?

----------

* The Times, 27 August 2012, Confusion reigns over the state of British debt:
A poll for the Centre for Policy Studies found that far more people wrongly believed that the coalition intended to cut debt over the next few years than correctly believed that it expected to increase it ...

While planning to bring down the annual deficit — the difference between what the Government spends and the money it receives and the amount of extra borrowing it incurs each year — the coalition nevertheless expects to lift total government debt by £600 billion between 2010 and 2015 ...

Total government debt is £1.03 trillion, equivalent to 65.7 per cent of Britain’s total national output. Add in liabilities kept off the balance sheet and it doubles to more than £2 trillion ...

Andrew Dilnot and honest political debate in the UK – 1

Time was when Sir Michael Scholar was the chairman of the UK Statistics Authority (UKSA) and he said, among other things:
“One of the reasons I took this job is that having good statistics is like having clean water and clean air. It’s the fundamental material that we depend on for an honest political debate ...”
You may want to tweak Sir Michael's point a bit. You may prefer to say that there are many fundamental materials, not just "good statistics", whatever "good" means. But if you're interested in honest political debate it's hard to gainsay him, Sir Michael is onto something.

Monday 20 August 2012

Civil servants are accountable to ministers ... or is it the other way round?

Whitehall is flying a kite in today's Times:
Whitehall looks to Labour as coalition tensions grow
Senior civil servants want closer links with Labour before the next general election, including helping with the party’s manifesto, The Times has learnt.

Informal discussions have taken place at the top of Whitehall on how to ease the Opposition’s possible transition to government and avoid a repeat of the policy fiascos and U-turns that senior mandarins believe have hampered the coalition since the election.

One option being considered is whether officials should be seconded to work with Labour as part of their career development. The move coincides with fears in Whitehall that the coalition is breaking up, with the two parties in government pursuing different paths over the next two years.

Civil servants argue privately that climbdowns on NHS reform, forestry privatisation, tax measures and the Lords could have been avoided if Whitehall had been involved earlier in some of the decisions ...
The polite myth is that civil servants are accountable to ministers and ministers are accountable to parliament.

No-one believes that, of course.

Civil servants don't seem to be accountable to anyone. Not to parliament, not to the common law, and not to any of the conventions of rational and responsible and dignified businesslike behaviour.

Nevertheless, it is as well to maintain the myth and avoid any Constitutional quibbling. Lady Jay and her House of Lords committee on the constitution are currently conducting an enquiry into the accountability of civil servants. No less than four former cabinet secretaries have appeared before the Committee and reaffirmed the doctrine.

If this kite flies, Lady Jay may have to invite their lordships back to clarify the position.

Civil servants are accountable to ministers ... or is it the other way round?

Whitehall is flying a kite in today's Times:
Whitehall looks to Labour as coalition tensions grow
Senior civil servants want closer links with Labour before the next general election, including helping with the party’s manifesto, The Times has learnt.

Informal discussions have taken place at the top of Whitehall on how to ease the Opposition’s possible transition to government and avoid a repeat of the policy fiascos and U-turns that senior mandarins believe have hampered the coalition since the election.

One option being considered is whether officials should be seconded to work with Labour as part of their career development. The move coincides with fears in Whitehall that the coalition is breaking up, with the two parties in government pursuing different paths over the next two years.

Civil servants argue privately that climbdowns on NHS reform, forestry privatisation, tax measures and the Lords could have been avoided if Whitehall had been involved earlier in some of the decisions ...
The polite myth is that civil servants are accountable to ministers and ministers are accountable to parliament.

No-one believes that, of course.

midata, the loneliest initiative in Whitehall – 3

The prospectus for midata, the new stock being touted around the market by the department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS), offers consumers not just access to their transaction data but also control of it. Due diligence reveals that this is just hot air. Control of your data is not on the menu. This sort of deception annoys subscribers. No reputable stockbroker would back the issue and no stock exchange would list it.

There's not much more than that to say – BIS is trying to float a wrong 'un – but for train-spotters, chapter and verse are quoted below:

On 3 November 2011 the Department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) issued a press release about midata:
The Government today announced a ground-breaking partnership with 26 major organisations that will see them working together to deliver a new era of consumer empowerment ...

Today’s announcement marks the first time globally there has been such a Government-backed initiative to empower individuals with so much control over the use of their own data ...
Heady stuff. midata was going to empower us. What does "empower" mean?

Control. We were going to get unprecedented control over our data.

But what does that mean?

Take an example. When you book a flight, for example, the travel agent/website passes on your data to the airline. Your name and address, starting point and destination, dates and times, credit card number, expiry date and security number, your passport number, your date of birth and so on. Obviously. They have to.

• ALON, the Airline Liaison Officer Network, operated by UKBA, Airline Liaison Officers' "main tasks include the provision of comprehensive training for airline staff on the United Kingdom's passport and visa requirements as well as basic techniques of passenger profiling and forgery awareness"
• ATC, the Authority To Carry scheme operated by UKBA, based on API/PNR and watchlists, airlines and other carriers can have their authority to carry refused
• BERR, the Department of Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, previously the DTI, Department of Trade and Industry
• BIODEV, an EU project to study the use of biometrics in visa applications
• Business Express, a registered traveller scheme like IRIS and miSense Plus
• CTA, the Common Travel Area = the UK + the Channel Islands + the Isle of Man + the Republic of Ireland
• DCMS, the Department of Culture, Media and Sport
• DCSF, the Department of Children, Schools and Families
• DfT, the Department for Transport
• DIUS, the Department of Innovation, Universities and Skills
• Eurodac, the "European fingerprint database designed solely to identify asylum seekers"
• FCO, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office
• Frontex, an intelligence driven "EU agency [which] complements and provides particular added value to the national border management systems of the Member States"
• HMRC, Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
• IATA, the International Air Transport Association = 265 airlines
• Interpol, "the world’s largest international police organization, with 187 member countries"
• IPS, the Identity and Passport Service, an executive agency of the Home Office
• IRIS, the Iris Recognition Immigration System, a registered traveller scheme like Business Express and miSense Plus
• J-BOC, the Joint e-Borders Operations Centre, part of UKBA
• members of the travel, tourism and hospitality sectors
• miSense Plus, a registered traveller scheme like Business Express and IRIS
• NDFU, the National Document Fraud Unit, part of UKBA
• other organisations, professional, educational and NGOs with an interest in migration and border and visa issues
• overseas law enforcement and security agencies
• Project Semaphore, the database system operated under contract by IBM to collect and disseminate advance passenger information and passenger name records (API/PNR), this is presumably the database that will now be sited in Wythenshawe, as Jacqui Smith inadvertently told everyone, and used by J-BOC
• Registered Traveller Schemes, including Business Express, miSense Plus and IRIS, any accelerated entry scheme, often biometrics-based
• Sea Carrier Liaison, an equivalent to ALON, being considered, may never exist
• SISII, the Schengen Information System II, "a database containing alerts on stolen objects and persons who are wanted for extradition, who are missing or who are subject to an entry ban for a particular country", the UK failed to connect to SIS for several years and may similarly fail with SISII
• SOCA, the Serious Organised Crime Agency
• SPT, Simplifying Passenger Travel, "a joint initiative amongst a number of key parties involved in the passenger's journey: passengers, airlines, airports, control authorities, and technological suppliers"
• the EU
• the Four Countries Group = UK + US + Canada + Australia
• the Islamabad Consular Immigration Link Team
• the police
• the Risk Assessment Unit (RAU) in Accra, RAUs process 90% of visa applications at FCO overseas posts on behalf of UKVisas
• the Sponsored Family Visitor scheme, one of four categories of visa, the other three being tourist, business and student
• the Welcome to Britain Group, brings together "representatives from transport, travel, hospitality, border processes and public diplomacy organisations" under the aegis of VisitBritain
• UKBA, the UK Border Agency, previously the Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND), = Home Office + FCO + HMRC
• UKTI, UK Trade and Investment, part of BERR, "can help you rise to the exciting opportunities and challenges that globalisation offers"
• UKvisas, previously a joint venture between the Home Office and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, now part of UKBA
• VisitBritain, "Britain's national tourism agency"
But it doesn't stop there. Your data goes further. We live in a big and complicated world and if you care to read the joint Home Office and FCO paper on eBorders, you'll find that your travel data is passed on to all or some of the hundreds of organisations listed alongside.

If you had control over your personal data, you'd be able to delete it from ALON's database. If ATC had made a mistake in recording your personal data, you'd be able to correct it. You could say which individuals at BERR could see your personal data and which individuals couldn't. At BIODEV, you could say that you only want people to see if you're over 21, yes or no, not your actual birthday.

That sort of control would be revolutionary – as things stand, you have no control whatsoever over your personal data once you've handed it over. It would take a worldwide change of the law to give you control. That would be a revolution. Without that revolution, you can't properly be said to have control. Was midata intended to be a revolution?

Several of us asked Ed Davey, the minister responsible for midata at the time. There was no answer.

That was back in 2011. Now roll forward to the joint BIS/Behavioural Insights Team document, midata 2012 review and consultation.

Norman Lamb has replaced Ed Davey as the minister responsible for midata, and in his Foreword he says (p.8):
A key project in the [consumer empowerment/economic growth] strategy is ‘midata’ which aims to give consumers more control and access to their personal data.
There it is again. "Control". And this time there's an explanation (p.23):
The programme defined the initial vision and principles and adopted “TACT” (Transparency, Access, Control and Transfer) as key stages in the sharing of data ...
where "control" is defined as:
Providers give consumers the ability to correct, update, change settings, preferences, permissions etc.
Those quotations seem to suggest that a revolution is on offer.

Against that, the midata consultation issued by BIS (pp.10-19) makes no reference to consumers being able to correct or delete the data held on them by suppliers and there is no hint that the laws concerning access to that data by consumers are about to be changed in the UK or anywhere else. Despite all the talk, control does not seem really to be on offer, midata is arguably a false prospectus.

At the midata open forum held on 9 August 2012, Kirstin Green seemed to confirm that point – access is on offer but not control. If anyone is going to the 23 August 2012 open forum, or the newly arranged forums on 4 and 6 September 2012, perhaps they could check this point with her. You can invite yourself. As BIS say, "... please email midata@bis.gsi.gov.uk to attend").

midata, the loneliest initiative in Whitehall – 3

The prospectus for midata, the new stock being touted around the market by the department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS), offers consumers not just access to their transaction data but also control of it. Due diligence reveals that this is just hot air. Control of your data is not on the menu. This sort of deception annoys subscribers. No reputable stockbroker would back the issue and no stock exchange would list it.

There's not much more than that to say – BIS is trying to float a wrong 'un – but for train-spotters, chapter and verse are quoted below:

Tuesday 14 August 2012

Cloud computing – we hold these truths to be self-evident ... and we're plumb wrong

Much of government IT is a mess.

That's the problem.

And cloud computing is the solution. What the UK Constitution needs is a government cloud, a G-Cloud.

Is that true? You know it is – it's a no-brainer.

Cloud computing is cheaper than the alternative and it always will be. You know that. It's more flexible – you can spin up new capacity whenever volumes rise, just like that, and switch it off at no cost the minute it's not needed. You don't need to worry, the level of security is higher than could be achieved in-house, someone else does the backups for you and keeps all the applications you have licences for up to date.

That's the sales pitch of the big suppliers of cloud computing services – Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Apple, ... And coincidentally it's the UK government's IT strategy. There can be no doubt.

Now consider this 6 August 2012 article in Wired magazine by Mat Honan:
In the space of one hour, my entire digital life was destroyed. First my Google account was taken over, then deleted. Next my Twitter account was compromised, and used as a platform to broadcast racist and homophobic messages. And worst of all, my AppleID account was broken into, and my hackers used it to remotely erase all of the data on my iPhone, iPad, and MacBook.

In many ways, this was all my fault. My accounts were daisy-chained together. Getting into Amazon let my hackers get into my Apple ID account, which helped them get into Gmail, which gave them access to Twitter. Had I used two-factor authentication for my Google account, it’s possible that none of this would have happened, because their ultimate goal was always to take over my Twitter account and wreak havoc. Lulz.

Had I been regularly backing up the data on my MacBook, I wouldn’t have had to worry about losing more than a year’s worth of photos, covering the entire lifespan of my daughter, or documents and e-mails that I had stored in no other location.

Those security lapses are my fault, and I deeply, deeply regret them.

But what happened to me exposes vital security flaws in several customer service systems, most notably Apple’s and Amazon’s ...
Where was Apple's security? And Amazon's? Where were their backups? Why can't they just go to their backups and retrieve Mr Honan's digital life?

Still. Don't let this dent your confidence in G-Cloud.

Cloud computing – we hold these truths to be self-evident ... and we're plumb wrong

Much of government IT is a mess.

That's the problem.

And cloud computing is the solution. What the UK Constitution needs is a government cloud, a G-Cloud.

Is that true? You know it is – it's a no-brainer.

Cloud computing is cheaper than the alternative and it always will be. You know that. It's more flexible – you can spin up new capacity whenever volumes rise, just like that, and switch it off at no cost the minute it's not needed. You don't need to worry, the level of security is higher than could be achieved in-house, someone else does the backups for you and keeps all the applications you have licences for up to date.

That's the sales pitch of the big suppliers of cloud computing services – Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Apple, ... And coincidentally it's the UK government's IT strategy. There can be no doubt.

Now consider this 6 August 2012 article in Wired magazine by Mat Honan:

Monday 13 August 2012

Home Office soon to be Ghoshless

Home Office press release, 13 August 2012:
Dame Helen Ghosh to leave civil service
Dame Helen Ghosh DCB is to step down as Permanent Secretary of the Home Office to take up the role of Director General of the National Trust, she announced today.

Dame Helen will leave the department in September after a 33 year career in the civil service ...

Head of the Civil Service Sir Bob Kerslake said: 'As Permanent Secretary at Defra and the Home Office, Helen has delivered extraordinary change including departmental reform, the independent UK Border Force and support for the successful London Olympics.

'She has been an inspiring leader, who has made a very strong corporate contribution, both via the Civil Service Board, leading the capability strand of our Civil Service Reform Programme and as a vibrant role model and champion of talent and diversity. I wish her every success in her new leadership role at the National Trust.'

Helen Kilpatrick, Director General of the Financial and Commercial Group, will stand in as interim Permanent Secretary until a replacement for Helen Ghosh is appointed.
National Trust press release, 13 August 2012:
Dame Helen Ghosh DCB will be the next Director-General of the National Trust
... She will take over from Fiona Reynolds who has been at the helm for nearly 12 years ...

Fiona Reynolds ... moves on to become Master of Emmanuel College, Cambridge in 2013 ...
Emmanuel College past events, 6 March 2012:
London Drinks
Café Koha in London’s Leicester Square once again played host to informal drinks on the evening of Tuesday 6th March ...

The timing of the event meant that members were able to mark the sad passing of Lord St. John of Fawsley (which meant a wealth of affectionate anecdotes about his time as Master) and also celebrate the news from earlier in the day of the appointment of Dame Fiona Reynolds as our next Master.
Emmanuel can give six months notice of the Master's successor. The National Trust can give six weeks notice of the Director-General's successor. That is orderly and proper. The Home Office can't tell us who Dame Helen's successor will be, six weeks or so before she leaves. That looks messy – lessons there for Sir Bob from Emma and the NT.

Dame Helen's move could hardly be announced before the Olympics were over. They didn't exactly wait for long after the closing ceremony, though, did they.

The Sunday Times told us on 15 July 2012:
Originally, it was decided that 10,000 guards, including any military contingent, would be required on peak days. By December, that figure was revised up to 23,700 with G4S providing 13,700 trained guards, including 3,300 students.

Dame Helen Ghosh, the Home Office permanent secretary, admitted last December that the initial estimate had been a “finger in the air” estimate, based on information from the 2002 Commonwealth Games in Manchester and the 2006 Winter Olympic Games in Turin.
That finger in the air was Sir David Normington's, Dame Helen's slippery predecessor. He left her a mess. She didn't sort it out and the army had to be called in at undignified short notice.

The independent UK Border Force, for the creation of which Sir Bob praises Dame Helen, was the clumsy response to an absolute fiasco – the Brodie Clark affair.

Dame Helen will find it very different working with the great Simon Jenkins at the National Trust after decades of more or less biddable ministers.

Who called the shots in what looks like Dame Helen's ejection? Ministers? Maybe. Sir Bob Kerslake? Sir Jeremy Heywood? Maybe. Considerable power lies with the suppliers these days, IBM, CapGemini, HP, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, Fujitsu, CSC, Atos and suchlike. Did they want her out? Was she standing up to them? Will we miss her as a result? None of us on the outside has a clue what's going on. We are left making convoluted surmises like this because so much of Whitehall is cloaked in secrecy. That is not, in the end, did they but know it, to the advantage of senior civil servants.

And for us, the public? Dame Helen's successor? We'll see. Let's hope for one who is more open with the Home Affairs Committee and, indeed, the public.

----------

BBC Radio 4, Profile: Dame Helen Ghosh

Home Office soon to be Ghoshless

Home Office press release, 13 August 2012:
Dame Helen Ghosh to leave civil service
Dame Helen Ghosh DCB is to step down as Permanent Secretary of the Home Office to take up the role of Director General of the National Trust, she announced today.

Dame Helen will leave the department in September after a 33 year career in the civil service ...

Head of the Civil Service Sir Bob Kerslake said: 'As Permanent Secretary at Defra and the Home Office, Helen has delivered extraordinary change including departmental reform, the independent UK Border Force and support for the successful London Olympics.

'She has been an inspiring leader, who has made a very strong corporate contribution, both via the Civil Service Board, leading the capability strand of our Civil Service Reform Programme and as a vibrant role model and champion of talent and diversity. I wish her every success in her new leadership role at the National Trust.'

Helen Kilpatrick, Director General of the Financial and Commercial Group, will stand in as interim Permanent Secretary until a replacement for Helen Ghosh is appointed.
National Trust press release, 13 August 2012:

Sunday 12 August 2012

midata, the loneliest initiative in Whitehall – 2

You will recall the Behavioural Insights Team and its work, the initiative being sponsored by Francis Maude's Cabinet Office.

At least you will if you have that annoying capacity for retaining trivial information which afflicts some people.

For the rest of you, a refresher ...

According to their website:
The Behavioural Insights Team was set up in July 2010 with a remit to find innovative ways of encouraging, enabling and supporting people to make better choices for themselves.

The Team’s work draws on insights from the growing body of academic research in the fields of behavioural economics and psychology which show how often subtle changes to the way in which decisions are framed can have big impacts on how people respond to them.

The Team’s remit is to apply these insights to public policy making in the UK ...
Governments devise policies. They want to achieve certain ends. They are more or less successful in that endeavour. Sometimes we proletarians accede in the government's wishes – we tend to put on our safety belts, for example, when driving. And sometimes we don't – there is no sign of us proletarians at large giving up the illegal use of recreational drugs, for example.

How do we proletarians decide whether to accede or to disobey? If only legislators knew the answers to that question, then maybe they could influence us to improve their success rate and, in their eyes, improve our lives.

The answers are deemed to lie in the insights of behavioural psychology and behavioural economics – "nudge theory", for short. There are various expressions of the gospel. Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness by Richard H Thaler and Cass R Sunstein, for example, and Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion by Robert Cialdini.

The marketing tricks used can be subtle, clever and effective in achieving quite unimpeachable objectives. There could be less legislation and regulation, less fining and imprisonment, more carrot and less stick. But somehow Rt Hon Oliver Letwin MP manages to make all this nudging look downright sinister:
Cameron Conservatism puts no faith in central direction and control. Instead, it seeks to identify social and environmental responsibilities that participants in the free market are likely to neglect, and then establish frameworks that will lead people and organisations to act of their own volition in ways that will improve society by increasing general wellbeing.
There is considerable skill required to nudge opinion and while they were still in opposition, David Cameron and his merry men displayed no facility whatever to influence people successfully.

So you might hope that they gave up on nudging when they came to power. But no. Instead, they set up the Behavioural Insights Team, with an advisory panel headed by Sir-Gus-now-Lord O'Donnell. The team met recently in Taunton to take stock and there is a presentation of their deliberations available here.

But perhaps we could make our own assessment.

The Department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) issued a press release on 3 November 2011 according to which:
midata is a voluntary programme the Government is undertaking with industry, which over time will give consumers increasing access to their personal data in a portable, electronic format. Individuals will then be able to use this data to gain insights into their own behaviour, make more informed choices about products and services, and manage their lives more efficiently ...

The midata programme marks a non-regulatory approach to consumer empowerment and is in keeping with the Government’s broader focus on transparency and openness.
Being a voluntary and non-regulatory initiative designed to help people manage their lives more efficiently, midata is definitively a candidate for the Behavioural Insights Team's skills. And, indeed, the recent midata 2012 review and consultation is published jointly by BIS and the Behavioural Insights Team:
Since the launch of Better Choices Better Deals: Consumers Powering Growth the midata programme has proceeded on a voluntary basis ... (p.11)

In the last year progress towards these goals has been made using the voluntary approach to the midata programme ... (p.13)

During the past year midata has been a voluntary partnership between the UK Government, businesses, consumer groups, regulators and trade bodies ... (p.20)

These are encouraging developments and we will continue to push forward midata on a voluntary basis ... (p.27)
The task is to nudge organisations into voluntarily giving people access to the personal data those organisations hold. And what subtle means have been devised by the Behavioural Insights Team to achieve that end?
This initial promise has convinced the Government that more should be done to unlock the benefits of this data revolution. That is why we are consulting on the possibility of taking an order making power. If utilised, this will compel suppliers of services and goods to provide to their customers, upon request, historic transaction data in a machine readable format ... (p.11)

The power would grant the Secretary of State the power to compel suppliers of goods/services to supply, at a consumer’s request, personal transaction data relating to their purchase/ consumption of products and services from that supplier in a machine readable format ... (p.13)

An order making power, if utilised, would compel suppliers of services and goods to provide to their customers, upon request, historic transaction/ consumption data in a machine readable format ... (p.14)

... we are exploring the option of taking an order making power that would enable us to compel suppliers of goods and services to provide their customers’ transaction/consumption data in a machine readable format ... (p.27)
The nudgers are meant to operate, remember, through "innovative ways of encouraging, enabling and supporting". All very modern and all flannel apparently. Faced with recalcitrance, what they propose is good old-fashioned compulsion through legislation.

midata, the loneliest initiative in Whitehall – 2

You will recall the Behavioural Insights Team and its work, the initiative being sponsored by Francis Maude's Cabinet Office.

At least you will if you have that annoying capacity for retaining trivial information which afflicts some people.

For the rest of you, a refresher ...

Friday 10 August 2012

midata, the loneliest initiative in Whitehall – 1

You will recall midata, the initiative being sponsored by Vince Cable's Department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS).

At least you will if you have that annoying capacity for retaining trivial information which afflicts some people.

For the rest of you, a refresher ...

midata is founded on the questionable belief that if the companies we deal with would only hand back all the details of business we have transacted with them in a standard, portable, digital format, then the economy would grow. These personal data stores (PDSs), so it is said, would foster innovation and competition and they would drive prices down and quality up. And we proletarians, armed with the record of our purchases, could at last start to make rational choices.

What kind of rational choices? At one end of the scale, fairly sensible ones, such as whether to switch to a different electricity supplier. At the other end, midata seems to be aimed at under-employed narcissists fascinated by how much coffee they drink, and chronic exhibitionists who want to let everyone else know when they mow the lawn:
Tallyzoo, a service dedicated to self monitoring, allows users to measure anything from their caffeine intake to the number of times they cut their grass. Users collect data using a mobile device or website program which creates interactive flashbased graphs enabling them to spot trends and patterns in their consumption habits, work, health and fitness goals. Data is manipulated so that users can share statistics and compare the end results.
The midata prospectus was for a voluntary scheme but its advocates are surprisingly tetchy about suppliers who won't join in, please see for example Government slams [mobile phone] operators for failing to sign up to Midata hub.

With next to no take-up among suppliers and next to no interest from consumers and no PDSs, clearly midata was in a bit of a mess under the nominal leadership of Ed Davey, the Lib Dem MP for Kingston and Surbiton, and minister for employment relations, consumer and postal affairs at BIS.

Then it got into more of a mess, when it lost its sponsor – Mr Davey went to Energy after Chris Huhne had to resign.

But the orphan midata didn't die. There's a new minister ready to bring it up, Norman Lamb, the Lib Dem MP for North Norfolk. And there's a review of midata progress to date and there's a public consultation to look forward to and there are three open forums you can attend at the London offices of BIS on 9, 16 and 23 August 2012.

DMossEsq attended the first forum for you and strongly recommends that you attend the other two. The event was hosted by Kirstin Green, a deputy director at BIS, flanked by David Miller, a BIS economist, and Gemma Lobb, another consumer empowerment strategist. So that's three of them – three BIS people – and there were three of us. Yes, three. Such is the interest inspired by midata.

Please try to get along to 1 Victoria St London SW1H 0ET. Please help. Kirstin, David and Gemma are utterly charming. It's not their fault that they've been landed with midata, a hopeless and friendless and pointless initiative on which their talents are indubitably wasted, and DMossEsq simply can't stand the idea of no-one turning up to their party on 16 and 23 August.

midata, the loneliest initiative in Whitehall – 1

You will recall midata, the initiative being sponsored by Vince Cable's Department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS).

At least you will if you have that annoying capacity for retaining trivial information which afflicts some people.

For the rest of you, a refresher ...

Monday 6 August 2012

The whiff of cordite in Whitehall 2

They spend about £700 billion of our money every year, much of it wasted. Whitehall's mandarins exercise the prerogatives previously reserved to Stuart kings. Their harlot power is jealously guarded, while all responsibility is taken by more or less hapless ministers. Challenges come and go. They're usually seen off, the politicians give up and we the public carry on paying.

You may as well know that the whiff is back, there is once again cordite in Whitehall. Francis Maude thinks that if ministers are to take responsibility, then they really ought to have some say in which officials manage the political initiatives and the associated budgets. The Guardian has the story – Ministers to be given say in civil service appraisals. So does Public Servant magazine – Ministers are to manage the Civil Service:
Maude's preference now is that ministers be involved in Civil Service appraisals and be given powers to hire and fire staff. And expert advice on how to ensure maximum efficiency should be sought from beyond Britain's shores if necessary.
Francis Maude v. the massed ranks of the senior civil service?

Good luck, Mr Maude.

The whiff of cordite in Whitehall 2

They spend about £700 billion of our money every year, much of it wasted. Whitehall's mandarins exercise the prerogatives previously reserved to Stuart kings. Their harlot power is jealously guarded, while all responsibility is taken by more or less hapless ministers. Challenges come and go. They're usually seen off, the politicians give up and we the public carry on paying.

You may as well know that the whiff is back, there is once again cordite in Whitehall. Francis Maude thinks that if ministers are to take responsibility, then they really ought to have some say in which officials manage the political initiatives and the associated budgets. The Guardian has the story – Ministers to be given say in civil service appraisals. So does Public Servant magazine – Ministers are to manage the Civil Service:
Maude's preference now is that ministers be involved in Civil Service appraisals and be given powers to hire and fire staff. And expert advice on how to ensure maximum efficiency should be sought from beyond Britain's shores if necessary.
Francis Maude v. the massed ranks of the senior civil service?

Good luck, Mr Maude.

Thursday 2 August 2012

Political will (if any) trounced by Dame Helen Ghosh and the Whitehall ancien régime

Trust the Home Office.

Last year's annual report and accounts to 31 March 2011 said that the UK Border Agency (UKBA) reduced its staff by about 1,900 during 2010-11 and planned to reduce it by a further 3,500 by 31 March 2015. These reductions would all be achieved by "efficiencies".

So there they were, dutifully implementing government policy, cutting staff.

On 22 November 2011, Dame Helen Ghosh DCB, permanent secretary at the Home Office, gave evidence to the Home Affairs Committee and said that the Border Force – part of UKBA at the time – would be reduced by 900 or so:
... that is driven as much by technological introductions like e-gates, as well as a risk-based approach. Border Force will be getting smaller ...
Advanced risk management and technology, all very modern, just the ticket for 21st century government, spearheaded by the dependable brainpower at the top of the Home Office.

Since then we have had queues at Heathrow, one actual strike by the Border Force and one threatened one and now what do the Times tell us?
Border Force in recruitment drive U-turn
Hundreds of new immigration officers are to be recruited by the UK Border Force weeks after it disclosed that 450 staff were cut last year to meet government spending cuts ...

The Home Office also admitted that advertisements for the new jobs placed on a Civil Service website said, inaccurately, that 800 new staff were required ...

Over the next few weeks it intends to recruit more officers than the total of 457 lost in the year to March 2012 ...

Keith Vaz, chairman of the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee, said: “I find it extraordinary that a year after making so many people redundant and paying so much in terms of redundancy costs, the very same organisation is now recruiting more immigration officers. It shows a lack of strategic planning concerning staff at both the UK Border Agency and UK Border Force” ...
Given that the technology doesn't work and we're going back to the 19th century and using people, will the technology contracts for eGates and  Jackie Keane's Immigration and Asylum Biometric Service be cancelled?

No.

We shall simply pay for both – for the additional staff and for the technology that doesn't work. The budget deficit will have to be cut somewhere else, not at Dame Helen's 21st century modern Home Office. Predictable result:

Whitehall 1 - 0 Westminster

Trust the Home Office.

Political will (if any) trounced by Dame Helen Ghosh and the Whitehall ancien régime

Trust the Home Office.

Last year's annual report and accounts to 31 March 2011 said that the UK Border Agency (UKBA) reduced its staff by about 1,900 during 2010-11 and planned to reduce it by a further 3,500 by 31 March 2015. These reductions would all be achieved by "efficiencies".

So there they were, dutifully implementing government policy, cutting staff.

Barclays (ouija) board says "non nein" to O'Donnell

According to Robert Peston, the BBC's chronicler of the credit crunch:
From my conversations with senior Barclays sources, I have learned there is a favoured candidate for each of its top vacancies.

The former head of the civil service, Lord O'Donnell, is the board of the bank's preferred choice as new chairman ...
Barclays faces the same problems as other banks at the moment – PPI, swaps, LIBOR, capital adequacy, maybe a bit of money-laundering thrown in, investigation by the US authorities, ... – with the added complication that it has to replace both its Chairman and its Chief Executive.

How likely is it that the board would choose as their new Chairman Sir-Gus-now-Lord O'Donnell, the architect of the credit crunch?

Not very, according to Martin Vander Weyer, Business Editor of The Spectator and son of an earlier Deputy Chairman of Barclays:
I don’t want to start a row with the hyper-sensitive BBC man as to who has the more senior Barclays sources — several of mine are so senior I can only reach them by ouija board — but I suspect someone has been feeding him hogwash.

... white smoke for the chair is unlikely before September ... everyone close to the process is sworn to secrecy, Gus O’Donnell is an underemployed ex-mandarin with minimal City experience ... So pace Pesto, I think the race is wide open.
Who is right? Peston or Vander Weyer?

No idea.

But our wellbeing and Barclays' will surely be better served if O'Donnell concentrates on his new responsibilities as Chairman of the Happiness Commission.

----------

Update
9 August 2012: Sir David Walker to succeed Marcus Agius as Barclays chairman
30 August 2012: Barclays names Antony Jenkins as chief executive

Barclays (ouija) board says "non nein" to O'Donnell

According to Robert Peston, the BBC's chronicler of the credit crunch:
From my conversations with senior Barclays sources, I have learned there is a favoured candidate for each of its top vacancies.

The former head of the civil service, Lord O'Donnell, is the board of the bank's preferred choice as new chairman ...
Barclays faces the same problems as other banks at the moment – PPI, swaps, LIBOR, capital adequacy, maybe a bit of money-laundering thrown in, investigation by the US authorities, ... – with the added complication that it has to replace both its Chairman and its Chief Executive.

How likely is it that the board would choose as their new Chairman Sir-Gus-now-Lord O'Donnell, the architect of the credit crunch?