Monday 7 September 2015

RIP IDA – what they didn't tell you about the future of GOV.UK Verify (RIP). Follow the entrepreneur


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, now known as "GOV.UK Verify (RIP)",
is the Cabinet Office Identity Assurance programme.
And it's dead.

GOV.UK Verify (RIP) 101
According to Introducing GOV.UK Verify (RIP), "GOV.UK Verify [RIP] is the new way to prove who you are online so you can use government services safely, like viewing your driving licence or assessing your tax".

It's a daunting prospect, "when you’re using digital services, you need to be sure that your privacy is being protected and your data is secure".

But don't worry, "GOV.UK Verify [RIP] is more secure than usual methods of proving who you are, because there’s no central storage of information". That is a contender for one of the world's great non sequiturs but, all the same, don't worry ...

... because "GOV.UK Verify [RIP] uses certified companies to check it’s you ... it takes less than a minute to verify your identity each time you need to use a GOV.UK service ... You choose the certified company (you can choose as many as you like, and you can change at any time). You don’t have an account with government ... no-one has more information than the minimum to perform their function".

Don't be confused, "GOV.UK Verify [RIP] isn’t a service in its own right. Rather, it provides a way into government services on GOV.UK".

Follow the entrepreneur
Last week saw the fifth Annual Investor Summit at the Four Seasons Hotel in Hampshire. 200 throbbing entrepreneurs were entertained for the day with a programme designed and sponsored by:
  • Ariadne Capital, "an investment and advisory firm which operates as an enabling platform for Corporates who seek to build new digital revenues, acquire digital start-ups and enhance their strategy, Start-ups who understand digital infrastructure and are building enabling technologies which will bring strategic advantage and revenues to Corporates, and Financiers who are seeking the winning industrialists of the day to back. We operate in the MediaTech, HealthTech, FinTech and Cleantech ecosystems".
  • EntrepreneurCountry Global, "Ariadne Capital is investing in the ‘Digital Enablers’ whose role is to bring new economics to larger, non-tech traditional businesses and industries ... EntrepreneurCountry, a subsidiary of Ariadne Capital, is operationalizing these economics for the larger, non-tech traditional businesses and industries (we call them affectionately Goliaths). By building in EntrepreneurCountry, Goliaths can build their ‘Digital P&L’ by formulating new hypotheses about how their business will work in the future, and how their industry should work. In our marketspace, we help Goliaths – whether they be banks, newspaper groups, retailers, transportation firms – build the future from the future, test pilot new ventures through EntrepreneurCountry’s ‘citizens’ who act as an early adopter group, and learn how the new economics of becoming a platform are superior to the current economics of their firm. Why are we doing this? [Good question] ... ",
  • Kemp Little, "Many law firms keep up with new technology. We lead it_ ... At Kemp Little, we are known for our ability to serve the very particular needs of a large but diverse technology client base. Our hands-on industry know-how makes us a good fit with many of the world's biggest technology and digital media businesses, yet means we are equally relevant to companies with a technology bias, in sectors such as professional services, financial services, retail, travel and healthcare".
  • ®ightsrer "was founded in May 2011 with the vision of enabling media businesses and brands to overcome the huge fragmentation in the online video market with a single technology platform for engaging audiences and transacting with optimal efficiency".
  • Xoriant, "we bring three core differentiators to every client engagement [Good] ...".
  • O2, "the Think Big Blueprint – our plan for people and planet – shows how we're going to get there. You can also download this as an e-brochure".
  • OIX "is helping drive the expansion of existing internet services and the rapid deployment of new online products. With its team of rivals, OIX has become a global center of excellence for the identity trust layer of online transactions serving as a test bed for business, legal and governance policies in the emerging open identity ecosystem".
You know what to expect from these events, don't you. The day opened with The future of Communications and networks followed by The future of India. You can watch for yourself as Arvind Gupta explains (1:09:55) that there are millions of people in India and millions of them have got mobile phones so, like him, you ought to be able to make some money there.



They covered The future of media and The future of conflict resolution. Not to mention The future of property and The future of banking & financial services.

Antony Barker, the Managing Director and Chief Pensions Officer of Santander forgot to mention the future in the title of his presentation, Harnessing energy to feed returns but then normal service was resumed with The future of backing creative artists and The future of story telling, followed by The future of democracy and citizenship and finally The future of retail.

So what?
So what was our Janet Hughes doing there?

Janet, remember, is the programme director for GOV.UK Verify (RIP). And GOV.UK Verify (RIP), remember, "provides a way into government services on GOV.UK". That's its job. Nowhere on GOV.UK does it mention how the idea of GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is to throw 60 million UK electronic identities (eIDs) like so much red meat to 200 keen-as-mustard entrepreneurs.

Nevertheless, there was Janet chatting about The future of identity to the assembled company (2:15:13).

She was a bit naughty. She didn't tell them any of the problems with GOV.UK Verify (RIP). Some of the younger entrepreneurs may have gone away thinking it works.

And she was lucky that no-one seemed to notice the logical howler when she said that she was basing her predictions on Wardley maps which, she said, don't tell you what's going to happen or when (2:21:40).

What her slides did tell the entrepreneurs is that she's got a few hundred thousand eIDs for them already and there are millions more where they came from, just you wait and see, Spring 2016, ... and the implication is that, if you can only harness the energy, you entrepreneurs will be able to feed all the returns you've ever dreamed of, for free – why else did Janet attend the event?

Nobody told you. But there it is. The future.

----------

Updated 9.9.15

Six months ago, back in March, the Government Digital Service (GDS) published an obituary, GOV.UK Verify (RIP): objectives for live. Like all good obituaries, we said, it's what's not included that is important. And there was a lot not included.

GDS have now updated the obituary, please see today's GOV.UK Verify [RIP]: an update on progress towards objectives for live, and would you believe it, everything is going swimmingly, progress is being made, satisfaction levels are going through the roof, the timetable will be adhered to.

That's one agenda. That's what GDS tell us, the public, and no doubt what GDS will tell their colleagues in the UK Civil Service tomorrow at #CivilServiceLive in Newcastle.

That's all about GOV.UK Verify (RIP) being used by the digitally literate public with a healthy credit history and a working broadband connection to access public services.

But that's not what GDS are telling the world's entrepreneurs, please see blog post above, which is "here comes GOV.UK Verify (RIP), fill your boots".

You see, it's what's not included that is important.


Updated 21.9.15

Today the GOV.UK Verify (RIP) page on the GOV.UK website was updated. It is designed to help central government departments confirm that you are you when you use their on-line services, while protecting your privacy and keeping your data secure. It uses "identity providers"/"certified companies" to do its job.

And it says that "GOV.UK Verify [RIP] is in public beta. While GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is in beta, it’s optional for users". In the mind of the Government Digital Service (GDS), GOV.UK Verify (RIP) may become mandatory if at some stage they deem the system at their whim to be no longer in public beta but live.

What would become mandatory is the use of GOV.UK Verify (RIP) to access public services. That's all you read about on the updated website. GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is all about viewing or sharing your driving licence information, for example, claiming a tax refund, and so on.

There is no mention of GOV.UK Verify (RIP) providing a platform for private sector services. There is no mention of the 200 entrepreneurs Janet Hughes was talking to on 4 September 2015 being able to use GOV.UK Verify (RIP) to help them make a profit.

Whether you think entrepreneurs making profits is a good thing or a bad thing is irrelevant. The point is that it's just not mentioned on GOV.UK, the public face on-line of UK central government. People aren't being prepared for the idea. People are being only partially informed. People are being misinformed.

Ms Hughes is the programme director for GOV.UK Verify (RIP). She has 1,915 followers on Twitter who will all know from her tweet this afternoon that the idea is to help build a market for identity services.

We know that. But no-one relying on the GOV.UK page knows it. They're not being told.

Why?

While you're scrabbling around looking for an answer to that question, you might also care to remember that the market for identity services has existed for decades, if not centuries. GDS aren't helping to build it from scratch.

Further, compared with the banks, in particular, GDS are ill-equipped to help with expanding the market for identity services.

Also, the services to which GDS promise to connect GOV.UK Verify (RIP)-users are in the main forever stuck on the horizon six months away.

GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is in trouble. GDS aren't telling us that but that's the message that comes across.


Updated 28.10.15

"On 26 October 2015 the Minister for the Cabinet Office Matt Hancock spoke at the Institute for Government on how digital transformation can improve government services." There is an excerpt of his talk available on the GOV.UK Verify (RIP) blog.

The Minister talked about "the development of GOV.UK Verify [RIP] and how he verified his identity on his mobile phone, in between meetings, using just the contents of his wallet".

We know what he means, we who are versed in the dogma of the Government Digital Service (GDS). But to an outsider, that second claim must look as though the Minister registered his identity using his phone and perhaps a £20 note.

Even an insider will be baffled by the claim that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) offers users "a level of ID security that wasn’t previously possible online". There's no telling what the Minister means by that ...

... but never mind that for the moment, because the blog post isn't about security, it's about the merits of GDS's user research: "When GDS trialled this service, they gave people a list, showing the logos of the [identity] providers they could choose. But this made people feel uncomfortable. It looked too commercial, in a space where you really want reassurance that you’re dealing with the government. So when the team replaced the logos with the names people responded diffenetly [sic] and more positively, and so of course that’s what now happens".

There it is, in black and white, the Minister and GDS know that users feel "uncomfortable" if GOV.UK Verify (RIP) looks like a commercial venture. Hardly surprising – Ministers and GDS have always promoted GOV.UK Verify (RIP) to the general public as though it's all about transacting with the government, GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is "the new way to prove who you are online, so you can use government services safely".

But that's misleading, as we followers of the dogma know. And as the Minister should know.

He must know that Janet Hughes, the GOV.UK Verify (RIP) programme director, is chatting up investment capitalists and entrepreneurs, extolling the benefits to them of GDS's identity assurance scheme. Take for example her appearance at the 4 September 2015 Annual Investor Summit, Follow the Entrepreneur.

Different messages for different audiences? Instead of each audience separately feeling confident about GOV.UK Verify (RIP), the result could be general mistrust. And as the Minister says, "of course that’s what now happens".

RIP IDA – what they didn't tell you about the future of GOV.UK Verify (RIP). Follow the entrepreneur


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, now known as "GOV.UK Verify (RIP)",
is the Cabinet Office Identity Assurance programme.
And it's dead.

GOV.UK Verify (RIP) 101
According to Introducing GOV.UK Verify (RIP), "GOV.UK Verify [RIP] is the new way to prove who you are online so you can use government services safely, like viewing your driving licence or assessing your tax".

It's a daunting prospect, "when you’re using digital services, you need to be sure that your privacy is being protected and your data is secure".

But don't worry, "GOV.UK Verify [RIP] is more secure than usual methods of proving who you are, because there’s no central storage of information". That is a contender for one of the world's great non sequiturs but, all the same, don't worry ...

... because "GOV.UK Verify [RIP] uses certified companies to check it’s you ... it takes less than a minute to verify your identity each time you need to use a GOV.UK service ... You choose the certified company (you can choose as many as you like, and you can change at any time). You don’t have an account with government ... no-one has more information than the minimum to perform their function".

Don't be confused, "GOV.UK Verify [RIP] isn’t a service in its own right. Rather, it provides a way into government services on GOV.UK".

Thursday 3 September 2015

RIP IDA – 1466442, or what the careers advisor said to GDS's prospective Privacy Officer


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, now known as "GOV.UK Verify (RIP)",
is the Cabinet Office Identity Assurance programme.
And it's dead.

Scenario
You are a careers advisor. A young person approaches you clutching a situations vacant ad. What do you advise?

Sit Vac
The Government Digital Service seeks to appoint a Privacy Officer, closing date for applications one week today, 10 September 2015:
Privacy Officer

Government Digital Service

We are seeking an experienced Privacy Officer to lead the data protection and privacy aspects of the GOV.UK Verify [RIP] programme, both within GDS and across our delivery partners ...

Interviews week commencing: 21/09/2015 ...
Advice
Who knows but you might advise as follows.

QUOTE

Each move you make in your career affects your subsequent opportunities. You could take your experience to GDS. Would that be wise? Perhaps. The world looks like a Privacy Officer's oyster at the moment, in the public sector and beyond – there are other employers and other users who need you.

"The strategy is delivery" is one of GDS's old mottos. It doesn't bear inspection. They promised that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) would go live in the spring of 2013. It didn't. And two-and-a-half years later it still hasn't.

The currently promised live date is March 2016, six months away. Will they deliver on time? If they don't, it's not going to look good on your CV.

As long as you're very junior and on short notice in your present job, you could join GDS in October. That will give you less than six months to knock GOV.UK Verify (RIP) into shape data-protection-and-privacywise. Is that feasible? You need to decide.

You're going to have your work cut out:
  • GDS have always promoted usability ahead of security. They have also promised that the public can have confidence in the security of GOV.UK Verify (RIP). You're going to have to educate GDS. And the public.
  • The identity hub that glues GOV.UK Verify (RIP) together was written by GDS themselves. A team of US and UK academics assessed the hub and declared it full of holes. Despite their claim to build trust by being open, GDS have stayed remarkably tight-lipped about these allegations. You will have to be genuinely open.
  • You may assume that one of your first jobs is to assess the GOV.UK Verify (RIP) liability model. It isn't. They haven't got one. Unlike the banks, who compensate you if your account is hacked, GDS make no mention of compensation and the so-called "identity providers" (IDPs) limit their liability to derisory levels. Good luck with that one.
  • The IDPs are paid a pittance by GDS so you won't have much traction there. GDS are in bed with an outfit called OIX and it doesn't help that OIX have just published a white paper saying that the IDPs can't do their job. What GOV.UK Verify (RIP) really needs is the banks, not IDPs.
  • Actually, they've published two white papers to that effect. In the second one, Reducing fraud and improving online safety through IDP signal sharing, OIX make it clear that as things stand there are no standards for monitoring account activity in GOV.UK Verify (RIP) and no established procedures to follow when exceptional events are detected. The banks, by contrast, have had that buttoned down for years.
  • In their white paper, OIX acknowledge "the risk that a Shared Signals system might be incorrectly perceived as a surveillance tool that could undermine some users’ confidence in GOV.UK Verify [RIP]". Signal sharing between IDPs is the opposite to what the public have been promised with GOV.UK Verify (RIP). The IDPs are meant to be independent, not colluding. People's data is meant to stay where it's put, not be transmitted all over the place. And any use to which it's put is meant to be undertaken by consent, which in this case it hasn't been. You're going to be very busy over Christmas ...
  • ... and thereafter, because GDS's relationship with the central government departments and agencies, the "Relying Parties" as they're known (RPs), the RPs that the public is trying to communicate with through GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is fragile. Fragile or non-existent. Non-existent with the National Health Service, for example, and with the Department for Education. Fragile with the Department for Work and Pensions, who are believed to have banned GDS from their premises, ... some little local difficulty with Universal Credit. Fragile with the Electoral Commission, to whom GDS gave an application system to register to vote which omits identity assurance. Fragile with the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs where the GDS system had to be abandoned in favour of paper and pen. And fragile with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs, who have had to remind people that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) isn't their system, it's GDS's.
  • Diplomacy will be the name of the game when it comes to dealing with the RPs. Your diplomacy. It will have to be yours because GDS have spent years telling the world that the rest of Whitehall is useless, traditional policy-making has broken down and the guiding principles of public administration need a revolution. Why would these much-maligned parties now rely on GOV.UK Verify (RIP)?
  • And why would the public rely on it? The public want their data kept safely and only used for limited purposes. Meanwhile, GDS cheer on every step towards open data without ever trying to distinguish between public data and personal data. GDS's previous boss described the laws constraining data-sharing as "myths". You'll need to provide solace to the public. You've got your comforting answers ready, of course, haven't you?
They're a rum lot, GDS. Not like the rest of Whitehall. That's deliberate. The impression is that the staff all wander around all day in a missionary zeal, interpreting the word of their executive director, ex-Guardian man Mike Bracken CBE CDO CDO, senior responsible owner of GOV.UK Verify (RIP). You may get to be interviewed by him if GDS stick to the 21 September timetable.

But you won't see him for long. He's off on 30 September to pastures new. As are all the other senior staff/prophets. The organisation you join is not the organisation you will work for.

UNQUOTE

RIP IDA – 1466442, or what the careers advisor said to GDS's prospective Privacy Officer


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, now known as "GOV.UK Verify (RIP)",
is the Cabinet Office Identity Assurance programme.
And it's dead.

Scenario
You are a careers advisor. A young person approaches you clutching a situations vacant ad. What do you advise?

Sit Vac
The Government Digital Service seeks to appoint a Privacy Officer, closing date for applications one week today, 10 September 2015:
Privacy Officer

Government Digital Service

We are seeking an experienced Privacy Officer to lead the data protection and privacy aspects of the GOV.UK Verify [RIP] programme, both within GDS and across our delivery partners ...

Interviews week commencing: 21/09/2015 ...
Advice
Who knows but you might advise as follows.

Monday 31 August 2015

RIP IDA – as tactfully as possible, the intensive care team take the family aside and prepare them for the inevitable


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, now known as "GOV.UK Verify (RIP)",
is the Cabinet Office Identity Assurance programme.
And it's dead.


OIX, the intensive care team, is well known to DMossEsq's millions of regular readers but for the rest of you:
Open Identity Exchange UK (OIXUK)

This is the UK arm of a global organisation working directly with governments and the private sector developing solutions and trust for online identity, specifically for the British citizen.

OIX UK works closely with the Cabinet Office on the Identity Assurance Programme.  This is the development of the GOV.UK Verify service.  The identity assurance process can also be applied to other, non government websites where proof of identity is wanted.

The OIX goal is to enable the expansion of online identity services and adoption of new online identity products.

We work as a broker between industries designing, testing and developing pilot projects to test real use cases.  All project results are published for the public in the form of white papers.

OIX UK is open to new members.  Non members are welcome to attend our workshops,  membership is preferred for participation in projects – contact us for further information.
OIX has just published not one but two white papers:
Jointly and severally conveyed, the message is the same – there's no hope, IDA is dead, GOV.UK Verify (RIP).

GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is designed to rely on so-called "identity providers" (IDPs). There are currently four IDPs – Experian, Digidentity, the Post Office and Verizon. Together, they are said to constitute a "market" in identity services.

According to OIX's first paper, The use of bank data for identity verification:
  • The current market for identity assurance identity services is not able to serve 100% of the population (p.4).
  • At this time of publication of this paper the GOV.UK Verify [RIP] service is a beta service. It has set a number of objectives to achieve before becoming a fully live service (p.5).
  • In this early market the supply chain of data sources to support the creation of digital identity has not yet evolved to support the GOV.UK Verify [RIP] initiative (p.5).
  • The Digital Data Deficit section below describes how many users assertions of identity cannot be digitally verified (p.5).
  • As a result, some people who don’t have credit accounts (such as a loan, mortgage or credit card) are not able to assert financial evidence (p.7).
  • ... providers are not able to refer to bank account data to establish that an identity has been active over time (p.7).
  • ... resulting in variable results for users and problems can occur when users attempt to validate money evidence (p.9).
  • ... there is insufficient evidence of activity history in currently available data sources (p.9).
  • The current market has need for more data sources to accurately verify identities across a wide demographic (p.12). 
OIX is being as diplomatic as you have to be on these occasions, dealing with the distraught family in the waiting room outside intensive care, but it is clear that as long as GOV.UK Verify (RIP) depends on the current IDPs, it's not going to get out of the beta phase and become live, it's dead.

The banks are thought by OIX to provide the solution to all the current GOV.UK Verify (RIP) problems. In that case, why bother to have the IDPs? They add nothing. They are irrelevant. Appendix B of OIX's paper is a list of the problems faced by the IDPs which can be solved by the banks. Everything that needs to be done can be done by the banks alone.

There is no reason for GOV.UK Verify (RIP) to retain the IDPs and OIX identifies two reasons not to mix them up with the banks:
  • ... digital identity services delivered by non-bank Identity Providers could erode the relationship between banks and their retail customers (p.11).
  • If a financial institution refuses to compensate a customer for the loss of funds arising from misuse of credentials because the customer granted access for an Identity Provider, then broader consumer confidence in the scheme will be undermined by adverse publicity (p.13).
We were originally told that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) would be live by Spring 2013. It wasn't and it still isn't. We are currently meant to believe that it will be live by March 2016. From what OIX tells us, that is clearly impossible.

GOV.UK Verify (RIP) will not survive the amputation of Experian, Digidentity, the Post Office and Verizon. What comes out at the other end will no longer be GOV.UK Verify (RIP). That's what OIX is telling us in its first paper.

We may look at the second paper in a later post, wherein you will discover that there is a keen desire to ignore the privacy guidelines for GOV.UK Verify (RIP), but that's quite enough for now.

----------

Updated 1.9.15

In Whitehallspeak, Experian, Digidentity, the Post Office and Verizon were part of GOV.UK Verify (RIP)'s first "framework".

Out of 80 initial expressions of interest, eight suppliers proceeded to sign a framework agreement with the Government Digital Service (GDS). Cassidian pulled out, as did Ingeus and PayPal, and despite promising repeatedly that they would, Mydex didn't become an IDP after all, which left GDS with just the four above.

A year ago, GDS launched a second framework, and six months later they'd netted five new IDPs – Barclays, GB Group, Morpho, PayPal again and Royal Mail. So now there are nine IDPs supplying GOV.UK Verify (RIP)?

No.

Just four.

The five new prospective IDPs still haven't been "on-boarded", as they say. In fact, they haven't been heard from for six months. Why? Where are they? What's going on?

RIP IDA – as tactfully as possible, the intensive care team take the family aside and prepare them for the inevitable


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, now known as "GOV.UK Verify (RIP)",
is the Cabinet Office Identity Assurance programme.
And it's dead.


OIX, the intensive care team, is well known to DMossEsq's millions of regular readers but for the rest of you:
Open Identity Exchange UK (OIXUK)

This is the UK arm of a global organisation working directly with governments and the private sector developing solutions and trust for online identity, specifically for the British citizen.

OIX UK works closely with the Cabinet Office on the Identity Assurance Programme.  This is the development of the GOV.UK Verify service.  The identity assurance process can also be applied to other, non government websites where proof of identity is wanted.

The OIX goal is to enable the expansion of online identity services and adoption of new online identity products.

We work as a broker between industries designing, testing and developing pilot projects to test real use cases.  All project results are published for the public in the form of white papers.

OIX UK is open to new members.  Non members are welcome to attend our workshops,  membership is preferred for participation in projects – contact us for further information.
OIX has just published not one but two white papers:
Jointly and severally conveyed, the message is the same – there's no hope, IDA is dead, GOV.UK Verify (RIP).

Sunday 23 August 2015

iRevolutionaries firing blanks

• "From the super smart @LouiseDowne"
Ben Terrett, Director of Design, GDS
• "it's the narrative we've been lacking
about why it's vital to focus on user …"
Neil Williams, Product Lead, GOV.UK
• "I will be referring people to this often"
Neil Williams again
Two months ago on 22 June 2015 Louise Downe published Good services are verbs, bad services are nouns on the GDS design notes blog. Her point? Apparently "verbs will change the way your service works".

Ms Downe is the Head of Service Design at the Government Digital Service (GDS) and considerable effort was put into divining what she meant. To no avail. It remains unclear what her advice is how to improve the design of government services.

On 6 August 2015 she published Better services with patterns and standards on the main GDS blog. She's talking about Government as a Platform (GaaP) and she's talking about service patterns. What is a service pattern?

Service patterns, she tells us, are "consistent (but not uniform)" standards that "will provide better interoperability between services, meaning that we can more easily join them up across government" and they will give government "a way to know how to provide a particular type of service well". Also, "service patterns will be our instruction manual for using platforms and registers to build better services".

No example of a service pattern is given. What do they look like? How do they promote interoperability? How do they raise standards? How will people learn from them? And what have service patterns got to do with verbs? All the reader knows is that "we’re still working out how the creation and management of a service pattern works" and "there’s still a lot to work out".

Service design is important. What does the UK criminal justice system (CJS) need? The answer was given on 18 August 2015 by Public Servant of the Year ex-Guardian man Mike Bracken CBE CDO CDO, executive director of GDS and senior responsible owner of the pan-government identity assurance programme now known as "GOV.UK Verify (RIP)": "It needs a good dose of proper service design thinking".

To that end, a multi-disciplinary team has been assembled to examine the CJS which shows that "digital people, technology, and thinking could transform the justice system". How does it show that? The team drew "a map of the entire criminal justice system". What's more, "this is something that's not been done before":


Mr Bracken couldn't be more wrong in this instance. It's been done thousands of times. Search Google for "criminal justice system flowchart" and you get about 157,000 hits. Click on "Images" and you can see as many maps as you like including this one, for example:


You can see the multi-disciplinary team's map but you can't read it. Even the bigger version is illegible. It's impossible as a result to tell whether the team have delivered on Mr Bracken's promise and re-designed the service to replace the present alleged mess which is the UK's criminal justice system.

"Of course it was never designed to work this way", Mr Bracken tells us, "but that's because it was never actually designed. The system we have today is the result of years of accretion, ad-hoc process on top of ad-hoc process, letter by letter, form by form".

While casually debunking the efforts of thousands of law-makers, lawyers and public officials over the centuries – "it was never actually designed" – it seems that it is Mr Bracken's team who have failed to design anything.

They haven't converted the CJS from a noun to a verb. There is no sign of a service pattern, whatever a service pattern is. The one innovation Mr Bracken lays claim to is that the latest map omits mention of any "organisations or government departments. That’s because that's not how users see the system". Says who?

Ignoring the distinctions between government departments is a conceit of the GaaP School. According to Mr Bracken, what would government without departments look like? How would it work? He hasn't told us.

Instead, he has announced his resignation and the government departments will have to soldier on as best they can without a Bracken – "he admits he is tired, and seems worn down by the demands of the job". That's what Computer Weekly magazine tell us in a long report of an interview with him conducted by the editor.

The media feed us a daily diet of cybersecurity breaches. Everyone knows that digital services are not secure. GDS are promoting digital public services. That looks tantamount to luring the public into danger. Despite its great length, there is no mention in the interview of security.

What Mr Bracken did tell the editor is: "It is a matter of fact, not opinion, that despite spending over £6bn a year on technology, digital and associated operations, there isn't a government service [developed by a department] that could be considered as a platform, as in that it works for all parts of government. That is a matter of fact".

No, it's not. It's not a matter of fact. As a matter of fact, we have had the Government Gateway system, a platform which works across all departments, since the turn of the century. It was developed by the Cabinet Office and has been subsequently maintained by the Department for Work and Pensions. For Mr Bracken to ignore it is once again to debunk the efforts of his colleagues.

The Gateway has been starved of resources for years now on the basis that it would soon be replaced by Mr Bracken's GOV.UK Verify (RIP). Years late, the benefits of GOV.UK Verify (RIP) remain on the horizon.

Talking about his four-and-a-half years at GDS, Mr Bracken says "for most of this period, digital has not been an institutional challenge. Now it is". In fact, life in Whitehall did not start with the birth of GDS, Whitehall was digitising where it could for 60 years before GDS existed and digitisation remains a challenge despite the gift of four-and-a-half years of GDS. "We, as a group of public administrators, have confidence we can create digital public services – that just wasn't there when I came". Yes it was.

"We've delivered billions of pounds of savings". Mr Bracken's numbers have turned out to be wrong before. Let's wait to see what the National Audit Office say about the value of savings made thanks to GDS.

Francis Maude, Sir Gus O'Donnell and Sir Jeremy Heywood all called for a revolution in Whitehall. All gave it their active backing through the establishment and subsequent support of GDS.

Revolutions are nasty violent events in which innocent people are hurt while megalomaniacs fight for power. Thank goodness our revolutionaries were firing blanks – "be consistent, not uniform", "show, don't tell", "don't procure, commission", "putting the users first", "good services are verbs", "agile", "cloud", "same, but different", ...

Perhaps "transformation" is a more appropriate word in this case. The UK would not benefit from a revolution but we could certainly do with a major transformation of public administration.

"We have shown we have a track record of delivery". No. Despite all the support they have received, transformation has not been delivered by GDS. It will take time and dedication. Too much time and dedication for Mr Bracken, who after a mere four-and-a-half years is off to work for the Co-op three days a week.

iRevolutionaries firing blanks

• "From the super smart @LouiseDowne"
Ben Terrett, Director of Design, GDS
• "it's the narrative we've been lacking
about why it's vital to focus on user …"
Neil Williams, Product Lead, GOV.UK
• "I will be referring people to this often"
Neil Williams again
Two months ago on 22 June 2015 Louise Downe published Good services are verbs, bad services are nouns on the GDS design notes blog. Her point? Apparently "verbs will change the way your service works".

Ms Downe is the Head of Service Design at the Government Digital Service (GDS) and considerable effort was put into divining what she meant. To no avail. It remains unclear what her advice is how to improve the design of government services.

On 6 August 2015 she published Better services with patterns and standards on the main GDS blog. She's talking about Government as a Platform (GaaP) and she's talking about service patterns. What is a service pattern?

Service patterns, she tells us, are "consistent (but not uniform)" standards that "will provide better interoperability between services, meaning that we can more easily join them up across government" and they will give government "a way to know how to provide a particular type of service well". Also, "service patterns will be our instruction manual for using platforms and registers to build better services".

No example of a service pattern is given. What do they look like? How do they promote interoperability? How do they raise standards? How will people learn from them? And what have service patterns got to do with verbs? All the reader knows is that "we’re still working out how the creation and management of a service pattern works" and "there’s still a lot to work out".

Tuesday 11 August 2015

Groundhog Day

We all woke up in the UK yesterday morning to the Daily Telegraph newspaper, among others, warning us about a ...
Government crackdown on firms employing illegal immigrants

Immigration minister James Brokenshire says the government [is] determined to act against businesses denying work to British nationals and driving down wages

Rogue employers who give jobs to illegal immigrants will be hit with the "full force" of the government machine ministers have warned.

Immigration minister James Brokenshire said the Government was determined to act against businesses which were denying work to British nationals and driving down wages ...
Yesterday was 10 August 2015.

But it might has well have been 28 December 2007, when we all woke up in the UK to the BBC, among others, telling us about a new advertising campaign:
Ads target illegal migrant hiring

A government campaign will warn bosses that they face large fines and prison sentences if they are caught employing illegal migrant workers.

The Home Office will run radio and print adverts ahead of a tightening of the law on illegal labour in February.

Employers could be fined up to £10,000 for every illegal worker they negligently hire, or could face up to two years in prison.

The immigration minister said firms would have no excuse to break the law.

Liam Byrne said: "Illegal working attracts illegal migrants and undercuts British wages. That's why we're determined to shut it down.

"The message is clear for employers - we will not tolerate illegal working."
We've moved on 7½ years and Liam Byrne has been replaced by James Brokenshire but otherwise nothing has changed. The Home Office continues to fulminate about hitting employers with the full force of the government machine which will not tolerate illegal working. That may give the impression of the Home Office taking action but of course that's just what they're not doing. As usual. Nothing changes.

In December 2006, the Identity and Passport Service (IPS) published their Strategic Action Plan for the National Identity Scheme. IPS was part of the Home Office and they promised at Annex 1 (p.25) that an "enhanced employee checking service" would be "available for employers" by June 2007. It wasn't available in June 2007 and it still isn't. IPS has now become HMPO, Her Majesty's Passport Office. Otherwise, nothing has changed.

UK Border Force technology 2015
IPS promised that ID cards would solve the illegal immigration and illegal working problems. They would also stop sex offences, false asylum claims, terrorism, identity fraud and inefficient public services, all thanks to biometrics, according to their 13-page October 2006 cost report on ID cards in which they promoted biometrics as the magic solution no less than 41 times.

The biometrics didn't work, they still don't, neither does the Home Office and now it's up to the Government Digital Service (GDS), part of the Cabinet Office, to identify us all and, presumably, to provide the means for proving our right to work.

It's not ID cards this time. Now it's GOV.UK Verify. Same difference.

Groundhog Day

We all woke up in the UK yesterday morning to the Daily Telegraph newspaper, among others, warning us about a ...
Government crackdown on firms employing illegal immigrants

Immigration minister James Brokenshire says the government [is] determined to act against businesses denying work to British nationals and driving down wages

Rogue employers who give jobs to illegal immigrants will be hit with the "full force" of the government machine ministers have warned.

Immigration minister James Brokenshire said the Government was determined to act against businesses which were denying work to British nationals and driving down wages ...
Yesterday was 10 August 2015.