RIP IDA

No need to say it, it goes without saying, it should be obvious to all but, just in case it isn't obvious to all, IDA is dead.

IDA is the Cabinet Office Identity Assurance programme. And it's dead.

----------

Updated 18 December 2013:

Identity assurance team to expand for 2014 launch The pan-government identity assurance programme is hoping to hire up to five people in January in preparation for the launch of its first live services early next year ... An official working on the programme recently explained that they are hoping for new providers to join next year, in particular to support level three assurance for more sensitive data.

Bit late – IDA was due to go live in the autumn of 2012.

Over a year later and they still haven't got the right staff.

And now they've discovered they've got the wrong suppliers (that is, the wrong so-called "identity providers").

Dead.

RIP IDA

No need to say it, it goes without saying, it should be obvious to all but, just in case it isn't obvious to all, IDA is dead.

midata kickstarts a collective inflection point in business

"What would you like for Christmas?", DMossEsq asked his maternal grandmother about 25 years ago.

"I want one of those typewriters with a television on top."

Word processing. That was a killer app. Its value was clear even to an old woman RIP who grew up 85 years before, travelling the highways and by-ways of Jamaica in a pony and trap.

And spreadsheets. Visicalc. Supercalc. Lotus 1-2-3. Excel. That was another killer app. All those book-keepers and auditors with their seven-column analysis paper. They didn't need to be told twice. It was obvious. The spreadsheet sold itself. And the microcomputer it ran on.

We've been promised killer apps for midata. Apps whose worth is so obvious that you just have to have them and you'll take midata as well, unthinkingly, because that's just the typewriter with a television on top that the apps run on.

"Hi I’m Dan, Director of the midata Innovation Lab, part of the midata voluntary [?] programme. I wanted take this opportunity to share my vision for the lab, or mIL as we call it", Dan Bates told us on 23 May 2013 when he was still Working with business to fan the flames of innovation. (He's left now.)

"I want some really interesting apps and services to come out of the mIL", Dan told Ctrl-Shift News back on 1 August 2013, "we want the mIL to be transformative. We want to kick start a collective inflection point in business ...".

Well?

What's happened?

You won't find out from Craig Belsham's blog ("information about midata"). We haven't heard anything from Craig since 1 October 2013 when he went to Glastonbury.

But don't be fooled by the silence. There are not one, not two, but five prototype apps midata are working on. Including MI FINANCES which gives you advice like

Save £70 a month by buying your own ingredients and cooking yourself. Your health may improve too!

and

You're having an average of 4 takeaways a month. Why not make it a special treat? Cut down to once a month and save £100.

Is that a killer app?

Ask Granny. She'll tell you. "Call that an inflection point in business? I don't think so. It's an electronic Mary Poppins. It's digital nagging and you can already be nagged through any number of channels. You great mooncalf, you don't need midata. How much is that Dan charging you for his re-heated apps? And why's he trying to put all the takeaways out of business?"

midata kickstarts a collective inflection point in business

"What would you like for Christmas?", DMossEsq asked his maternal grandmother about 25 years ago.

"I want one of those typewriters with a television on top."

Word processing. That was a killer app. Its value was clear even to an old woman RIP who grew up 85 years before, travelling the highways and by-ways of Jamaica in a pony and trap.

And spreadsheets. Visicalc. Supercalc. Lotus 1-2-3. Excel. That was another killer app. All those book-keepers and auditors with their seven-column analysis paper. They didn't need to be told twice. It was obvious. The spreadsheet sold itself. And the microcomputer it ran on.

We've been promised killer apps for midata. Apps whose worth is so obvious that you just have to have them and you'll take midata as well, unthinkingly, because that's just the typewriter with a television on top that the apps run on.

Next week's news

Just to remind you, some time over the next 168 hours, as promised, we shall see the first ever fruits of the Government Digital Service's identity assurance programme. We shall all be able to amend our tax codes through an on-line connection to HMRC.

Extraordinary, but they won't have the field to themselves.

Remember midata, the latter-day South Sea Bubble being blown by the Department for Business Innovation and Skills? They've been "fanning the flames of innovation" round at the midata Innovation Lab and some time over the next 168 hours we are promised a glimpse of the fruits of their labours, too.

At last, new apps to empower us and improve our lifestyles and make the economy grow.

---

There's not a single mooncalf left in the world who believes that these apps will be free, is there?

---

Suppose, just for the sake of argument, that the DMossEsq blog is right and that there is no such thing as a secure website.

Then it would be a mistake for any supplier to try to sell you a service on that basis – the secure website sales pitch undermines trust in any supplier using it. At least two of GDS's "identity providers" do just that. Mydex and Verizon both promise you security. That's a mistake. There are no unicorns for them to deliver.

Better, surely, to say that every effort will be made to keep your personal data secure, but security can't be guaranteed.

We have a sad new example of the problem. Experian Sold Consumer Data to ID Theft Service. It should be made clear that Experian didn't mean to sell consumer data to ID thieves and that they're co-operating fully with the police investigations. But it happened.

Experian, like Mydex and Verizon, are UK "identity providers", on whom GDS's identity assurance programme depends.

---

The best you can hope for is that security breaches will be kept to an affordable minimum. How do you achieve that? Answer, you make the supplier of the on-line service responsible for losses.

How have the UK retail banks managed so well to maintain public trust in on-line banking? By paying – when you are defrauded, the banks have to compensate you.

That works (para.6).

---

Next week's news

Just to remind you, some time over the next 168 hours, as promised, we shall see the first ever fruits of the Government Digital Service's identity assurance programme. We shall all be able to amend our tax codes through an on-line connection to HMRC.

Extraordinary, but they won't have the field to themselves.

Remember midata, the latter-day South Sea Bubble being blown by the Department for Business Innovation and Skills? They've been "fanning the flames of innovation" round at the midata Innovation Lab and some time over the next 168 hours we are promised a glimpse of the fruits of their labours, too.

At last, new apps to empower us and improve our lifestyles and make the economy grow.

---

mirelationship with midata

"Today’s most successful businesses are the ones that are creative about building customer relationships". That's what Jo Swinson says. It's not obviously true. But she's the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) minister in charge of consumer affairs and that's how BIS have chosen to try to sell midata.

The consultancy advising BIS on midata, Ctrl-Shift, reckons that these days "the challenge (and opportunity) is to start building an information sharing relationship with customers where both sides use data sharing to save time, cut costs and be more efficient – and to add new value". If you're in any doubt, just remember that "far-sighted managers recognise the ground is shifting under their feet. If they don’t adapt they risk medium to long-term isolation and marginalisation". Are you far-sighted? Or isolated and marginalised.

That message is reiterated by Mydex, the personal data store (PDS) company. Mydex is closely related to both Ctrl-Shift and BIS and they say that PDSs "transform relationships between individuals and organisations to both sides’ benefit" (p.7). And from his position on the midata strategy board, the chairman of Mydex seems to have convinced BIS that midata needs PDSs to work.

The relationship in question is generally between individuals who buy products and services and the companies that sell them. But according to the Young Foundation last November Mydex and its PDSs will also transform the relationship between "the citizen and the state" – "It is a bit like flipping a world where companies engage in ‘customer relationship management’ into one in which individuals engage in ‘vendor relationship management’. Now the citizen is in charge".

And that same promise is made by the Cabinet Office in connection with data-sharing: "Minister for the Cabinet Office Francis Maude today [25 April 2012] made a statement in response [to an article in the Guardian], pointing to the Government’s commitment to putting the citizen in charge, not the state".

Do you believe Mr Maude? Do you even understand what he's saying? You'll be "in charge", not the state – what does that mean?

Are the Young Foundation right when they suggest that the result of sharing your data with, say, Nestlé will be to put you in charge of the company? In what way will telling Nestlé that you like Gold Blend^® be to your benefit? What are Mydex talking about? And do you think that Nestlé will be isolated and marginalised if you don't tell them?

Is Jo Swinson right that the most successful companies are those that build a relationship with you and that midata will make the economy grow? Before you answer, would it help to know that BIS's own economist working on midata – David Miller – isn't convinced?

Do you want to be badgered all day every day with a lot of nosy questions about your Gold Blend^® consumption? If you ask Norman Lamb, Jo Swinson's predecessor at BIS, what all this relationship lark amounts to, that seems to be the intention: "midata also creates opportunities for new markets to develop where businesses help consumers use their data to make better consumption decisions and lifestyle choices" (p.10).

And how much do you think you'll have to pay for all this helpful lifestyle advice?

What we seem to have here is a concerted campaign whose stated objectives give rise to a lot of questions the answers to which are not obvious. The only effect of this campaign that is clear is that you will hand over all/a lot of your personal data to companies and government departments. Is that what you would like to do? Why?

Remember that Mydex is not just a PDS supplier – it is also one of the UK's eight appointed "identity providers". As part of Mr Maude's Identity Assurance Programme (IDAP), Mydex's job will be to confirm that you are you when you apply for Universal Credit, for example, or when you attempt any other digital-by-default on-line transaction with the government.

You don't think, do you, that a PDS is actually a sort of dematerialised ID card? And that that's actually why all the jovial souls above want you to organise all your data for them? To make IDAP work. At least that would make sense, unlike all the strange claims above.

IDAP was meant to be "fully operational" by March 2013, four months ago. That's what Mr Maude's Government Digital Service (GDS) promised, and there's no sign of it yet. Once these chaps have got used to missing deadlines it tends to become habit-forming. So there's no need to hurry. Take your time before making your mind up.

But if you do ever find yourself being tempted to sign up to midata, do remember that it's not a trivial decision, as Mydex themselves warned everyone the other day ("MIL" = midata Innovation Lab):

MIL volunteers "offer up their body for science"; ie share Midata with MIL organisations. Thus a few help make it safe for many. — Mydex CIC (@MydexCIC) July 9, 2013

mirelationship with midata

"Today’s most successful businesses are the ones that are creative about building customer relationships". That's what Jo Swinson says. It's not obviously true. But she's the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) minister in charge of consumer affairs and that's how BIS have chosen to try to sell midata.

Economics made simple

The Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) belatedly issued a press release about the midata Innovation Lab which includes this:

Consumer Affairs Minister Jo Swinson said: "Today’s most successful businesses are the ones that are creative about building customer relationships. The new ’midata’ Lab is an exciting opportunity to put this to the test and explore how businesses could help customers use the data around their spending habits to make better choices. "There is a lot to be gained from being open and using the information gathered on customers with their knowledge. Developing new and innovative ways to see data also helps improve customer service which will in turn promote growth. I would encourage businesses and developers alike to take advantage of this opportunity and establish themselves as a market leader in the digital market."

Is that true? Do you have a "customer relationship" with Unilever? If not, it doesn't seem to have stopped Unilever from becoming a pretty successful business. What is Ms Swinson talking about? What does she know about economics? Very possibly, nothing, but it doesn't stop her claiming that midata will "promote growth". Utterly unconvincing, where does this idea come from?

Does it come, perhaps, from Professor Sir Nigel Shadbolt's Open Data Institute (ODI)? He's in charge at the ODI and he's in charge of midata and he says::

The Open Data Institute is catalysing the evolution of open data culture to create economic, environmental, and social value. It helps unlock supply, generates demand, creates and disseminates knowledge to address local and global issues.

Where did the ODI get this idea from? Was it, perhaps, from the Shakespeare Review?

Famously, Stephan Shakespeare – the founder of YouGov, the political polling organisation, the man who is devising a national data strategy for the UK – believes simultaneously that (a) you can't tell how much it will cost to open up Public Sector Information (PSI) and (b) the return will be "orders of magnitude" higher than the cost. But where did he get the idea?

Was it, perhaps, from the European Commission? Yes, them again:

Europe's New PSI Directive ... The expected effect of this new set of guidelines is also to generate income, as PSI data is raw ore to developers' — public or private —gold. Neelie Kroes, Vice-President of the European Commission and head of the Digital Agenda, highlighted the potential economic value of going open with PSI: "Opening up public data means opening up commercial opportunities, creating jobs and building communities." She heralds it as a necessary transformation of European public and private culture. Despite the welcome perspective of promoting transparency and racking up to €140bn in business and employment, critics quibble that the new directive could have gone further ...

Probably. Possibly. Who knows where these Economics for Dummies ideas come from? They're memes. It's all something to do with the hive brain. That's what the artificial intelligence people would have us believe. Neural networks can demonstrate that we bees can take concerted action, but never how we manage it.

So many experts in economics, they pop up everywhere, like mushrooms, but can you be sure that opening up PSI will help the economy to grow by €140 billion? No. You know that.

All you can be sure of is that your personal data will be harvested along with the public data, as the midata Innovation Lab have confirmed (your public education, health and travel data will all be added to your passport number and National Insurance number and bank account details), and that you will be required to store your data in a personal data store (midata), which "identity providers" will then use to confirm your identity whenever you interact with the government to access public services (IDAP/the identity assurance programme).

And don't forget – it's now illegal in the UK not to register on-line to vote.

The economic result of all the proposed data-sharing is unknown. The only thing that's certain is that you will be enrolled in a national or possibly even a pan-European identity management system.

World-class economics expert though she may be, that's what Jo Swinson's really talking about. Even if her officials haven't told her.

Economics made simple

The Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) belatedly issued a press release about the midata Innovation Lab which includes this:

Consumer Affairs Minister Jo Swinson said: "Today’s most successful businesses are the ones that are creative about building customer relationships. The new ’midata’ Lab is an exciting opportunity to put this to the test and explore how businesses could help customers use the data around their spending habits to make better choices. "There is a lot to be gained from being open and using the information gathered on customers with their knowledge. Developing new and innovative ways to see data also helps improve customer service which will in turn promote growth. I would encourage businesses and developers alike to take advantage of this opportunity and establish themselves as a market leader in the digital market."

Is that true? Do you have a "customer relationship" with Unilever? If not, it doesn't seem to have stopped Unilever from becoming a pretty successful business. What is Ms Swinson talking about? What does she know about economics? Very possibly, nothing, but it doesn't stop her claiming that midata will "promote growth". Utterly unconvincing, where does this idea come from?

Dialogue of the deaf

In accordance with the Justice and Security Act 2013, the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament (ISC) has today laid before Parliament its 2012-2013 Annual Report:

... The threat the UK is facing from cyber attacks is disturbing in its scale and complexity: we have been told this year that the threat is at its highest level ever. The theft of intellectual property, personal details, and classified information causes significant harm, both financial and non-financial. It is incumbent on everyone – individuals, companies and the Government – to take responsibility for their own cyber security. We support the Government‟s efforts to raise awareness and, more importantly, to strengthen our nation's defences ...

That's what the ISC say.

Meanwhile, parliament is putting its data in the cloud – so is the Government Digital Service (GDS), HMRC, the MOD and the Home Office – the Cabinet Office is compiling an on-line electoral roll, GDS has appointed eight "identity providers" to make public services digital by default and the Department for Business Innovation and Skills wants us to store all our personal data on the web, in personal data stores.

That makes it hard, to say the least, for "everyone ... to take responsibility for their own cyber security".

Is anyone listening to the ISC?

Dialogue of the deaf

In accordance with the Justice and Security Act 2013, the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament (ISC) has today laid before Parliament its 2012-2013 Annual Report:

... The threat the UK is facing from cyber attacks is disturbing in its scale and complexity: we have been told this year that the threat is at its highest level ever. The theft of intellectual property, personal details, and classified information causes significant harm, both financial and non-financial. It is incumbent on everyone – individuals, companies and the Government – to take responsibility for their own cyber security. We support the Government‟s efforts to raise awareness and, more importantly, to strengthen our nation's defences ...

That's what the ISC say.

Meanwhile, parliament is putting its data in the cloud – so is the Government Digital Service (GDS), HMRC, the MOD and the Home Office – the Cabinet Office is compiling an on-line electoral roll, GDS has appointed eight "identity providers" to make public services digital by default and the Department for Business Innovation and Skills wants us to store all our personal data on the web, in personal data stores.

That makes it hard, to say the least, for "everyone ... to take responsibility for their own cyber security".

Is anyone listening to the ISC?

Smiley's people

Writing in today's Guardian, Simon Jenkins makes the case that reality comprises the bits John le Carré cuts out of his novels.

There follows the transcript of an interview with John Le Carré by BBC Radio 4 Front Row’s Mark Lawson. This interview never happened. ML: My guest today is David Cornwell, better known as John le Carré, the chronicler of the secret services who needs no further introduction. John, we were talking before going on air about how much of a novel never sees the light of day and that seems a good place to start, do you write and then discard a lot of scenes? JleC: Not if I can help it. Writing is quite hard work and you have to be organised in order not to waste your energy. But occasionally a scene will slip in, it will get past the positive vetting procedures and then fail at the editing stage. For example, in my latest novel, I had a character called Simon, an atheist so fascinated by churches that he visited them compulsively and wrote erudite books about them. ML: Was church history going to play a major rôle in the book? JleC: Of course not, that’s my point, this was a case of over-elaborate characterisation, a beginner’s mistake, you just don’t get such people in real life and they don’t make long speeches about the security services being out of political control. I actually made the same mistake with another character, Janet, an American, long settled in the UK, a trained philosopher, once a firebrand socialist, now mugged by reality, she was supposed to have a column in the Telegraph. I ask you! It’s embarrassing just to remember it. Who’s going to believe that? Maybe some earnest young undergraduate, but my readers wouldn't take the tosh I had coming out of her mouth about US presidents sanctioning mass surveillance and impounding journalists’ notebooks. My readers demand reality, feet firmly on the ground. ML: That sounds very serious. Is there no humour allowed in a le Carré book? JleC: There’s the odd high table epigram, I suppose, but you have to be careful with humour. I had a character called Stephan, for example, and I thought the scenes with him in were going swimmingly but then my editor pointed out that poor old Stephan just sounded like a buffoon, not the idea at all, and his appearances were verging on slapstick. Complete loss of dramatic tension. Out he had to go. What I think people want from my books is an insight into the hidden decision-making processes of public administration. Stephan was arguing that all personal information should be made public for the greater good. But he couldn't think of any way the greater good would be advanced. In everyday life, that would be the end of his project, Whitehall would kick it out, but in early versions of my book he was allowed to pursue his ridiculous programme. No good, you see – I'm not selling fantasy. ML: I'm interested that you should talk there of public administration and Whitehall civil servants. Your books are political but there are no politicians in them. JleC: I think the odd minister may turn up every now and again but, no, in the main, it’s best to have the politicians as silent characters, influences who make their requirements known mysteriously, they’re more effective that way. I tried putting a character called Nick in at one stage, a deputy prime minister who bore no resemblance whatever, I need hardly add, to any living person. Nick, in the book, was trying to introduce a computerised national electoral roll while heaping opprobrium on the previous administration for trying to introduce ID cards and a computerised national identity register. He claimed that he was a liberal, promoting democracy, and at the same time legislated to make it a criminal offence not to register. Hopelessly incredible, out went those scenes and the book is much improved now, in my opinion, with Nick saying nothing. ML: The waste paper basket next to your desk is beginning to overflow, isn’t it? JleC: Now now, Mr Lawson, I know I'm old, but waste paper basket, indeed! No, I press the delete button, just like other writers. But yes, you’re right, my recycle bin is filling up. I had a couple of journalists in the first draft, Fraser and Charles, writing sermons in defence of the security services, but they were caricatures, no journalist today would bend the knee just because of a D-Notice and Fraser, in particular, was meant to be a brave Leveson refusenik. It didn't make sense having him support official mass surveillance in the same breath. And I went a bit over the top having Charles compare Edward Snowden to the real spies of the Cold War. A silly mistake that the character Charles was far too intelligent to make. ML: So what are we left with in the novel, John, what is there for your loyal readers to look forward to? JleC: I'm rather hoping they’ll buy the book and find out for themselves but it’s not giving too much away to say that the plot revolves around a pretty young salesman called Martha who convinces a cynical former permanent secretary that all public services in the UK should be delivered on the internet and they hire a web designer from the Guardian and put him in charge of creating a national identity assurance system. He’s never done anything like that before but they get him a computer guru to help, some chap who’s left the BBC under mysterious circumstances, and soon they have a veto over government policy and they take control of government cloud computing. Only, a few days later, it’s announced that the US National Security Agency have access to everything in the cloud, there is no privacy, no confidentiality, no secrecy. Coincidentally, parliament has just decided to put all its computing in the cloud and there’s a tense scene where Joan, the woman in charge, says that it doesn’t matter about the NSA listening in, or the Chinese, or the Russians, because everything in parliament is meant for public consumption anyway and on the same day that the Intelligence and Security Committee announce that cyberattacks are the biggest threats facing the country the Board of Trade kicks off an initiative called "midata" to get everyone to store all their personal data in cyberspace. ML: And that’s the bit you expect your readers to believe? Good luck with that, Mr Cornwell, and thank you for that insight into the writer's craft. More reality, my guest tomorrow has amassed a fortune making radical feminist films in the backstreets of Havana. Join us again to find out how it's done. Until then, goodbye.

Smiley's people

Writing in today's Guardian, Simon Jenkins makes the case that reality comprises the bits John le Carré cuts out of his novels.

midata and the BBC. The BBC?

from Craig Belsham's midata blog: Hi I’m Dan, Director of the midata Innovation Lab, part of the midata voluntary programme ... we will help empower UK consumers in a really meaningful way ...

The BBC are not paid to talk twaddle with a lot of armchair economists.

They are wasting our money,

they shouldn't have joined in the first place

and they should resign from mIL now.

Following last week's exciting launch of the midata Innovation Lab (mIL), now that the party's over, let's take a look at the structure of the organisation. It's a partnership apparently, "a collaboration of the following 22 Founding Partners, respected organisations collaborating with real data to work out how the UK both empowers and protects consumers whilst innovating with data":

Back in November 2011, the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) issued a press release saying:

Businesses and organisations that have so far committed to working in partnership with Government to achieve the midata vision are: - Avoco Secure - billmonitor - British Gas - Callcredit - EDF Energy - E.ON - Garlik - Google - Lloyds Banking Group - MasterCard - Moneysupermarket.com - Mydex - npower - RBS - Scottish Power - Scottish Southern Energy - The UK Cards Association - Three - Visa

That's 19 businesses from Avoco Secure to Visa, of whom only three remain "committed to working in partnership with Government to achieve the midata vision". Why have the other 16 dropped out?

The press release also said:

The following consumer groups and regulators are working with midata to represent consumers' interests and concerns. As well as working towards potential benefits, their input plays an important role in identifying potential risks and helping determine how these can be addressed: - Citizens Advice - Communications Consumer Panel - Consumer Focus - Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) - OFCOM - Office of Fair Trading (OFT) - Which?

That's seven consumer groups/regulators, of whom only two are left. Why have the other five pulled out?

And why are there still 22 Founding Partners left?

What, for example, is the University of Southampton doing on the list?

Their expertise is in oceanography. Nothing to do with midata.

The answer is all to do with the Open Data Institute (ODI), who are also on the list of Founding Partners. The ODI is headed by Professor Sir Tim Berners-Lee and Professor Sir Nigel Shadbolt. They are both professors at Southampton and presumably the university has come along for the ride.

But they shouldn't be there. The ODI is all about open data. Public data. The opposite of what midata is meant to be about, which is personal data. Private data. The two should not be confused. Nigel Shadbolt himself says so:

@DMossEsq #opendata and #midata are entirely distinct varieties of data - and it is essential that people understand the difference — Nigel Shadbolt (@Nigel_Shadbolt) June 10, 2013

But there they are, the ODI and Southampton and, what's more, Professor Shadbolt is chairman of the midata programme as well as chairman of the ODI. This is a mess.

The inclusion of O2, Telefonica and Verizon among the founding partners makes a bit of midata sense. The idea behind midata is that consumers should be able to get better value from their phone contracts. Ofcom have failed to ensure good value for money. Having O2, Telefonica and Verizon involved will help to make sure that midata fails as well.

The link between midata and the Government Digital Service's failed Identity Assurance Programme (IDAP) isn't always obvious to other people but readers of this blog will remember that Verizon is one of the UK's eight appointed "identity providers".

from Craig Belsham's midata blog: My name is Stephen and I head up the work on consumer confidence and trust which is part of the midata voluntary programme ... A data-enabled online market place will create new services that will take your data and do some really interesting things with it ...

They will also remember that, thanks to Edward Snowden, we now know that Verizon hands over its data to the US National Security Agency (NSA), who may or may not share it with the UK's GCHQ. Your personal data may travel via midata even further than Southampton.

The idea behind midata is (also) that consumers should get better value for money from their gas and electricity contracts. It is precisely because Ofgem have failed on that score (along with the Prime Minister) that BIS assert that midata is needed. Having Ofgem and npower on board – as oceanographers say – will ensure that midata fails as well.

midata is meant to help consumers to get better value for money from their current accounts and their debit/credit cards. That's a job MoneySupermarket.com already work at and have done for years which, in turn, is another reason why midata is unnecessary.

from Craig Belsham's midata blog: I’m Richard and I chair one of the expert working groups looking at what we need to do to ensure that consumers can be confident when they allow their data to be passed to and used by third parties who are developing new and innovative applications to aggregate and use existing data in a way that brings benefits to users of these new services ... A data rich economy will allow lots of innovative companies to create brand new services that will enable you to take your data and do some really interesting things with it ...

The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) exists to ensure that personal data remains private and that public data is disclosed unless it is exempt under the Freedom of Information Act. If the ICO doesn't close down mIL in the next few days, then it's not doing its job.

Mydex provides personal data stores (PDSs). midata relies on PDSs. That's the way BIS have designed it with the assistance of the midata strategy board. The chairman of Mydex is a member of the midata strategy board. BIS also retain Ctrl-Shift as consultants to advise them on midata. Ctrl-Shift advise BIS to use Mydex and, as readers of this blog know, Alan Mitchell, the director of Ctrl-Shift, set up Mydex with William Heath, the chairman of Mydex, the one who is also a member of the midata strategy board, and Mr Heath used to be a director of Ctrl-Shift and he retains a material shareholding in Ctrl-Shift, so you can understand why BIS, Mydex and Ctrl-Shift are among the Founding Partners of mIL.

Also, of course, Mydex is a UK-appointed  "identity provider", like Verizon, reinforcing the link to IDAP.

Jo Swinson is the successor at BIS to Norman Lamb who was the successor to Ed Davey. She wrote an article about midata which was published by Which?, who hosted a lengthy debate about the article on their website – 54 comments. No-one – including Which? – could see how midata would deliver the benefits that Jo Swinson and BIS promised.

Norman Lamb published a report on midata and launched a consultation on it. Question 6 of the consultation is: "What types of new services might be offered by intermediaries (such as, price comparison websites) and what could be the value of this new market?". In their response, Which? said, in full: "Which? has no comment on this question".

On the other hand, they wrote several pages in their response about the dangers of identity theft/fraud and the dangers of the loss of privacy. Are Which? satisfied that these dangers will not be exacerbated by midata? If so, why? And if not, will they, like the ICO, do their job of protecting consumers and warn people against midata?

In the case of all the Founding Partners named so far you can see why they are included in mIL. Even if, like the ODI, they shouldn't be.

But the BBC? What are the BBC doing there? They're a public service broadcaster. That's what the licence fee payers pay them to do. The BBC are not paid to talk twaddle with a lot of armchair economists. They are wasting our money, they shouldn't have joined in the first place and they should resign from mIL now.

When Ed Davey first announced midata, the BBC's own technology correspondent, Rory Cellan-Jones, asked "what's the catch for consumers and why is the government getting involved?". To which we may now add, why is the BBC getting involved?

midata and the BBC. The BBC?

from Craig Belsham's midata blog: Hi I’m Dan, Director of the midata Innovation Lab, part of the midata voluntary programme ... we will help empower UK consumers in a really meaningful way ...

The BBC are not paid to talk twaddle with a lot of armchair economists.

They are wasting our money,

they shouldn't have joined in the first place

and they should resign from mIL now.

Following last week's exciting launch of the midata Innovation Lab (mIL), now that the party's over, let's take a look at the structure of the organisation. It's a partnership apparently, "a collaboration of the following 22 Founding Partners, respected organisations collaborating with real data to work out how the UK both empowers and protects consumers whilst innovating with data":

Wanted: 1,000 mooncalves

You may have mercifully forgotten all about midata.

Well bad luck, because midata excitement is about to sweep the nation.

23 May 2013: "Hi I’m Dan, Director of the midata Innovation Lab, part of the midata voluntary programme. I wanted take this opportunity to share my vision for the lab, or mIL as we call it", said Dan Bates, who is gamely Working with business to fan the flames of innovation.

Only three weeks later, 13 June 2013: "I'm Richard and I chair one of the expert working groups looking at what we need to do to ensure that consumers can be confident when they allow their data to be passed to and used by third parties", said Richard Koch, the man in charge of Authentifying [sic] customers and their representatives.

Two weeks later still, 27 June 2013: "Jo Swinson, Minister for Employment Relations and Consumer Affairs, talks about the Government’s midata programme". That's what it says in Minister for Consumer Affairs talks about the UK Government’s midata programme, followed by a 90-second video of Jo Swinson telling us that thanks to midata, for the first time, we'll get bank statements, as though we've never seen one before.

Mysteriously, that video has disappeared, so that if you click on the link, what you get now is no-one talking about midata.

Next day, there's a salvo on Twitter from Dan:

RT @midataBIS: One week to go to #midata innovation lab launch: video from @joswinson on why we're doing it http://t.co/JEgPucM6bz — Dept for Business (@bisgovuk) June 28, 2013

The unbearable tension in the coiled spring that is midata looks like being released tomorrow, 4 July 2013.

That's when the midata Innovation Lab will be unveiled and presented to a hungry public.

What should we expect?

It's all laid out in a charming little cartoon that even you can understand, Video introduction to midata innovation lab:

All Dan's asking is for 1,000 extraordinary people to give him all their bank account data, gas and electricity bills, and mobile phone usage records. He will then add all their educational records, culled from Nigel Shadbolt's Open Data Institute, all their health records and any travel records he can find and, while keeping your data completely safe, he will give the whole lot to some innovative flame-fanning app developers you've never heard of to develop services which you will find it impossible to live without although quite what those services are likely to be is anyone's guess except to say that they will "empower" you and boost the economy.

You may be a bit worried by all the risks with midata identified by Which? magazine/The Consumers' Association. The cost of accreditation and regulation, the opportunity for fraud, the loss of privacy, and so on. You shouldn't be – you can rightly feel "confident", as Richard says, about this whole Innovation Lab business, the cartoon with the nice guitar music tells you that the midata Innovation Lab is full of nice people you can trust.

Nevertheless, if you don't feel that you personally can help Dan in his mission, don't worry, it's all "voluntary".

Equally, don't be selfish. Perhaps you could at least inveigle three or four of the more socially responsible people you know into volunteering their entire life history in this good cause.

They won't lose anything – as Jo Swinson told us in her disappeared video, their data will still "belong" to them. And Jo. And Dan. And Richard. (And Stephen. Forgot to mention Stephen. Also Stephan 'embrace the change' Shakespeare. And Craig – how could anyone forget Craig?) And Sir Nigel. And the app developers. And the NSA. And GCHQ. And anyone else with access to the cloud.

----------

Updated 9.7.13

MIL volunteers "offer up their body for science"; ie share Midata with MIL organisations. Thus a few help make it safe for many. — Mydex CIC (@MydexCIC) July 9, 2013

Updated 10.7.13
Somewhat late in the day, the Department for Business Innovation and Skills have issued a press release about the midata Innovation Lab, Businesses get creative with consumer data at the ‘midata’ Innovation Lab launch.

Wanted: 1,000 mooncalves

You may have mercifully forgotten all about midata.

Well bad luck, because midata excitement is about to sweep the nation.

23 May 2013: "Hi I’m Dan, Director of the midata Innovation Lab, part of the midata voluntary programme. I wanted take this opportunity to share my vision for the lab, or mIL as we call it", said Dan Bates, who is gamely Working with business to fan the flames of innovation.

Wake up, Spectator

As you will know thanks to Edward Snowden, the National Security Agency (NSA) in the US and the UK's GCHQ have been intercepting hundreds of millions of people's communications.

Mr Snowden's revelations have been published in the Guardian from 6 June 2013 onwards and here in the UK the public have been thoroughly patronised ever since by all other major media outlets.

Take the Spectator, for example. In their 15 June 2013 edition the leading article, 'Top Secrets', says:

This week’s exposé of the US National Security Agency has been heralded as the greatest intelligence leak since the Pentagon Papers. It is nothing of the sort. Far from revealing some institutional outrage, the whistleblower Edward Snowden merely appears to have found what any low-level intelligence source might find. Intelligence agencies try to find things out about certain people. Spies spy, and can be innovative in their techniques. Rapid technological advances mean that the amount of snooping is growing at a faster rate than laws and regulations have been able keep up. But where is the scandal?

The spying is being done for our own good, to protect us, by two benevolent states, the spies are dedicated public servants doing their patriotic duty, what else would we expect, we would have to be naïve and credulous and other-worldly to be surprised, everyone knew about it, ...

That's the line. Strange, in that case, that the Spectator have never mentioned it before.

The allegation is, according to the Spectator, that the NSA and GCHQ spy on each other's citizens, thereby getting round the fact that it's illegal for them to spy on their own citizens:

Even if true, this has not proven to be a matter of any great concern for the general public. Opinion polls on both sides of the Atlantic suggest that people are not particularly bothered. People appear to recognise that the security agencies must exercise unique powers to intercept and thwart people who wish to harm us.

Since when did the Spectator abdicate thought and resolve political issues by appealing to opinion polls?

There's a one-word answer to that – never. Which suggests that the article wasn't written spontaneously. The editor is following a script. And not very well, because the article goes on to say:

The same is not true for the taxman, who would quite like some of these powers for himself. The government’s ‘snooper’s charter’ is an attempt to give any government department, even town halls, various degrees of power to pry in the name of ‘national security’ ...

"The same is not true for the taxman"? Why not? Same logic – it's all for the public good, the state has a duty to collect the right amount of tax, nothing-to-hide-nothing-to-fear, what else would we expect, ... Now who's being naïve and credulous and other-worldly?

Given that the occasion for the Spectator's leading article is the publication of the NSA's and GCHQ's secrets, how could they expect to be taken seriously when they write:

Spies are quite good at keeping secrets; governments are not.

And then this:

... what might happen if information relating to people’s medical records were leaked to a government employer or a health insurance company?

"What might happen if information relating to people’s medical records were leaked"? What do they mean "if"? This is on the way to becoming government policy, as the Spectator should know.

Stephan Shakespeare, the founder of YouGov, the political polling organisation, has been asked to produce a National Data Strategy. The state should allow people's health and education data to be exploited, he says in the Shakespeare Review, and his recommendations have been welcomed by Francis Maude, Cabinet Office minister.

The Spectator should also know that Mr Maude's digital-by-default policy for public services depends on so-called "identity providers" getting us all on-line with a personal data store. And that his Electoral Registration and Administration Act provides for us all to maintain our entry on the electoral roll on-line – the electoral roll, that is, which will be used for the 2015 general election. And that his G-Cloud policy is the fastest way yet discovered for the government to lose control of our data.

It's about time the Spectator woke up to midata, the Department for Business Innovation and Skills initiative which is meant to use the same "identity providers" to get us to store our personal data on-line where GCHQ and the NSA can get at it for our own good:

My name is Stephen and I head up the work on consumer confidence and trust which is part of the midata voluntary programme ... A data-enabled online market place will create new services that will take your data and do some really interesting things with it ... Hi I’m Dan, Director of the midata Innovation Lab, part of the midata voluntary programme ... By putting information back into the hands of consumers, and by encouraging business to release data, investing in products that consumers want and that use this information, we will help empower UK consumers in a really meaningful way ... I’m Richard and I chair one of the expert working groups looking at what we need to do to ensure that consumers can be confident when they allow their data to be passed to and used by third parties who are developing new and innovative applications to aggregate and use existing data in a way that brings benefits to users of these new services ... A data rich economy will allow lots of innovative companies to create brand new services that will enable you to take your data and do some really interesting things with it, with the ultimate goal of making sure you can get the best deal across a range of services.

There are safeguards, the Spectator tell us:

In reality, MI5 and MI6 already have powers to intercept anything categorised as a ‘communication’. Permission is needed — but it is sought and granted. It is wrong for MI5 or the CIA to engage in a ruse to cut out the paperwork. But let us not pretend this makes either into a 21st-century Stasi.

Public confidence in those safeguards is not increased by Mr Maude's attitude to data-sharing between, say, GCHQ and HMRC:

I want to bust the myths around the complexities of data sharing ... we aim to find effective ways of using and sharing data for the good of everyone.

Who's in charge of the £650 million cybersecurity budget that presumably paid for GCHQ's communications interception systems? Francis Maude.

The Spectator quite properly holds out against the provisions of the Leveson report. Let's see a little of the same prudently sceptical spirit applied to this NSA and GCHQ business.

----------

Updated 27 December 2013:

Wake up, Spectator?

Fraser Nelson is the Editor of the Spectator.

And judging by an article of his in today's Telegraph six months after the post above was published he's woken up, please see The state should be exposing the cyber-snoops, not joining them.

Hallelujah.

Wake up, Spectator

As you will know thanks to Edward Snowden, the National Security Agency (NSA) in the US and the UK's GCHQ have been intercepting hundreds of millions of people's communications.

Mr Snowden's revelations have been published in the Guardian from 6 June 2013 onwards and here in the UK the public have been thoroughly patronised ever since by all other major media outlets.