A UK COALITION FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION?
A DISCUSSION PAPER

27 June 1996

Peter Clegg, Association for Geographic Information

1 INTRODUCTION

Proposals for a United Kingdom Coalition for Public Information (UKCPI) were put forward by Professor Charles Oppenheim at an initial meeting organised by the Institute of Information Scientists on Monday 20 May 1996. Although not all the organisations represented at that meeting were convinced of the need for such a Coalition, it was none the less agreed that a further ‘brainstorming’ meeting should be organised. This discussion document is intended as the basis for this second meeting.

2 WHY MIGHT WE NEED A COALITION?

The perception that the UK Government lacks a coherent policy towards information and information provision, particularly with regard to information held by the Government itself, seems to have increased in recent years, driven at least in part by rapidly improving technologies to provide ready access to information through the so called ‘information superhighway’, multimedia and so forth. Much of this argument has already been made in Charles Oppenheim’s original paper and does not need repeating in detail here.

At the same time, the Government and the Information Industry are having to deal with an ever increasing number of organisations with a particular interest in information and information provision. Whilst a few years ago it was reasonable to assume that information professionals were largely, if not exclusively working within the province of libraries - hence the combination of Library and Information Science at several of our Universities - this is no longer the case.

With the rise of the use of technology has come an increasing awareness in disciplines outside the libraries that it is the information purveyed by that technology, not the technology itself that must be the primary focus at both societal and commercial levels. This in turn has led to the growth of organisations such as the Society of Public Information Networks (SPIN) and the Association for Geographic Information (AGI) which have members with little or no background in library work.

Moreover, many IT and other professionals now focus on information rather than technology as the key to increased business success; hence the rise in management information systems, enterprise information systems, ‘intranets’ and the like. This shift from an emphasis on technology to information content is also reflected in initiatives such as the EC’s INFO2000 Programme.

Inevitably, the proliferation of organisations with an interest in ‘information’ leads in turn to fragmentation with regard to the promotion of policies to improve the availability, management and delivery of information. Thus we have had a number of government initiatives to resolve the issues, each being set up or attended by differing groups of information professionals often having little knowledge of what others are doing. For example:

The Library and Information Commission established by the Department of National Heritage;
The AGI/IGGI (Interdepartmental Group for Geographic Information) ‘round table’ discussions on the supply of government held information;
The House of Lords Enquiry into the Information Superhighway;
The DTI Information Society Initiative;

The involvement of Europe with EC initiatives such as INFO2000 makes this lack of cohesion even more problematic. It is thus difficult if not impossible for most organisations, let alone individual information professionals to keep abreast of, far less influence, UK and European information policies. If it is difficult for the information professional, then how much more difficult is it for the private individual who is supposed to be the ultimate beneficiary of the ‘Information Age’! If we can’t even get at information about information, how do we get to the information itself?

With so much diversity, why do we need yet another organisation to deal with the situation? The short answer is that we don’t - if that organisation is simply set up in opposition to/competition with the many other organisations already in existence. What is needed, however, is a mechanism to support cooperation and cohesion between organisations; to provide an authoritative source as to who is doing what and why; to coordinate and enhance campaigns organised by individual groups and organisations to increase their authority and the comprehensiveness of their arguments; to promote discussion and resolve disputes where the aims and objectives of particular interest groups are in conflict; to ensure that issues are properly aired and discussed so that decisions are not unduly influenced by unrepresentative pressure groups to the detriment of the information industry and society as a whole.

The UK is of course not alone in identifying and endeavouring to resolve these issues. The model for the UKCPI put forward in this paper is largely based upon Canada’s Coalition for Public Information, in turn an initiative of the Ontario Library Association, and the author of this paper is heavily indebted to all those involved in producing the public policy framework drawn up by the Canadian Coalition. It is perhaps worth noting that Canada has felt the need for such an organisation even though a rather higher value seems to be placed on making government information readily available in that country. It is also of note that although the Canadian CPI was conceived and promoted within a library organisation, it is now no longer constrained by such an environment.

3 POSSIBLE ROLES FOR A COALITION

Four possible, not necessarily exclusive, roles for UKCPI might be:

a Influencing UK Government and European Community Policies on Information

The UK Government’s current policy is that free competition in an open market place unfettered by regulation is sufficient to provide the information resources necessary to enable the UK to take full advantage of the business and social opportunities provided by the global information society. The Bangemann report amongst others spells out clearly why such an approach may well be insufficient.

"Market segments based on the new information infrastructures cannot provide an adequate return on investment without a certain level of demand. In most cases, competition alone will not provide such a mass, or it will provide it too slowly...

In addition, everyone involved in building up the information society must be in a position to adapt strategies and forge alliances to enable them to contribute to, and benefit from, overall growth in the field...

As we move into the information society, a regulatory response in key areas like intellectual property, privacy and media ownership is required at the European level in order to maximise the benefits of the single market for all players...

The information society is global. The Group thus recommends that Union action should aim to establish a common and agreed regulatory framework for the protection of intellectual property rights, privacy and security of information, in Europe and, where appropriate internationally...

Europe has a vested interest in ensuring that protection of IPRs receives full attention and that a high level of protection is maintained. Moreover, as the technology advances, regular world-wide consultation with all interested parties, both the suppliers and the user communities, will be required...

The Group believes that without the legal security of a Union-wide approach, lack of consumer confidence will certainly undermine the rapid development of the information society.

The aim should not be to freeze any set of regulations, but rather to establish procedures and policies through which the exploding dynamism of the sector can be translated into greater opportunities for wealth and job creation."

It could be argued then, that there is a need for the information community to persuade the Government of the strength of Bangemann’s arguments and to influence the establishment of both an appropriate legislative framework and Government policies with regard to the information it itself holds.

Two possible models for the UKCPI suggest themselves:

i As a lobbying organisation either directly or through mobilising support for member organisations.

ii By working with government and government agencies (again directly or indirectly) to promote a better understanding at Government level of the issues involved and the commercial and other opportunities stemming from a positive and structured approach to the information society.

b To Facilitate Information Exchange

The initial meeting to discuss the possibility of a Coalition for Public Information was attended by over 80 separate organisations. A number of other ‘relevant’ organisations were invited but for one reason or another did not attend. No doubt many other organisations with an interest in information and the information society were not invited. With this many organisations, it is clearly impossible for most people to keep track of all the potentially relevant developments.

One role for the UKCPI would be to act as a ‘clearing house’ for information on relevant developments. If a mechanism can be found such that all organisations involved in promoting the information society can inform a single reference point which in turn can be accessed by all those seeking information, this would go a long way to easing the situation.

Possible activities could include the maintenance of a circulation list for reports and papers, structured to cater for special interests so that such reports could be targeted to a relevant subset, rather than the entire coalition; the production and distribution of a newsletter or similar; the maintenance of an appropriate web site, properly resourced to keep it up to date, with pointers to other relevant sites and so forth.

c To Promote Discussion And Awareness

Closely related to information exchange is the need to promote discussion and awareness both amongst: information professionals; press and television; and the public at large. As well as the activities already suggested, UKCPI could actively produce a programme of press releases, briefing papers and the like to promote media interest and discussion. It could also be active in promoting relevant conferences organised by UKCPI members and possibly sponsor its own national or regional events when suitable issues arise.

d Commissioning/Undertaking Research

In many areas of public policy, it may well be necessary for research to be undertaken before particular policies can be determined. Suitably funded, the UKCPI could commission (or even undertake directly), publish and publicise suitable research projects. Possible topics might include intellectual property rights or alternative models for Government charging policies.

4 A NATIONAL VISION

The Canadian CPI has proposed that its government should develop a National Vision which should have at its core an enabling policy statement. The proposed statement would seem equally applicable to the UK.

"1 A guarantee of the right of every individual to ready, effective, equitable and timely access to information in order to participate fully in the social, economic, political, educational, and cultural life of the country.

2 Recognition that the open flow of information is essential for the empowerment of individuals as full participants in a democracy, with all the inherent rights and responsibilities that participation requires.

3 Recognition that information in its artistic and practical forms is essential for the enrichment of the human spirit and that access to it will enhance the richness of the [UK’s] cultural experience.

4 Recognition that the open flow of information is critical for developing a society that is creative, innovative and entrepreneurial, and which can produce the wealth necessary to support an enriched social and cultural agenda.

5 Promotion of the development of, and access to scientific, technological and business information as a means of promoting entrepreneurship.

6 Recognition that life-long learning and continued research is essential to further social and economic development of [the UK and the British].

7 A Guarantee of open, timely and unencumbered access to the information that is gathered and organised by government for the benefit of the people it serves.

8 Recognition that cost should not prevent universal access to a public information service."

5 BENEFITS OF A STRUCTURED APPROACH TO THE INFORMATION HIGHWAY

The Canadian CPI expresses some concerns that a purely commercial approach to the information highway may inhibit the full realisation of potential benefits. Whilst "there is no doubt that a thriving, profitable business sector lays the foundation of any country’s well being", none-the-less, "the private sector has already begun referring to users of the information super highway as "customers", emphasising the "product for sale" approach that drives their involvement."

Whilst recognising the economic benefits in the development of information and communications technology, the Canadian CPI also realises "that there are potential benefits... that are not purely economic in nature...[but] have the power and the potential to enhance the quality of life... Together they can create new opportunities and better ways for people to communicate with each other."

The Canadian CPI identifies the following benefits:

• Expanding everyone’s opportunities for education and lifelong learning through the electronic delivery of elementary, secondary, college, university and special interest courses.
• Bringing better and less expensive social services and healthcare to all...regardless of where they live.
• Making it possible for government at all levels to be more accessible to their constituents.
• Enhancing the skills of the ... workforce by training and retraining workers and managers in the technological skills required for information-intensive environments.
• Allowing people with disabilities to have access to information and learning opportunities on the same basis as the general population.
• Simplifying...access and use [of] computer technologies, enabling the formation of "virtual communities" for the creation and sharing of information and ideas in all walks of life.
• Renewing civic responsibility by relating people directly to social sector services through new modes of interactive communication.
• Creating new ways of providing access to the vast collection of publicly-owned cultural resources that are in our museums, galleries, archives, cultural centres and libraries.
• There is a further consideration, and this involves small business: In today’s (and tomorrow’s) knowledge-based economy, the most valuable resource is information and the capability for enhanced communications.
  [It is important that] this resource continues to be available to the individuals, organisations and importantly, those who currently fuel the economy, the small business sector. The current and future electronic information formats are not always easily accessible, yet without access, it is possible that an "electronic information monopoly" could exclude all but large business interests, thus crippling the ability of small business to gain and maintain a competitive edge.

The Canadian CPI also identifies the following negative implications:

• Many jobs and services could be lost as the whole middle sector is replaced by direct delivery of services and goods to the home and the workplace.
• Virtual schools, libraries and other virtual services may replace actual services, without fully replicating the service.
• Jobs can be "wired" out of the country and done in cheaper labour markets.
• Telework and homework will rise but may not be accompanied by employment standards and union rights.

6 STRATEGIC TOOLS AVAILABLE TO GOVERNMENT

The Canadian CPI identifies a number of tools which the government could use to promote the national vision outlined above. These include: legislation, regulation and policy; grant programmes; and a number of other options. In essence "Legislation and Regulations should:

• Prevent telephone or cable monopolies.
• Extend the concept of "universal service" to the information and communication infrastructure.
• Define public/private/social sector roles in the development, governance and operation of the information highway.

6.1 UK Legislation and Policies

Within the UK., the following legislation and policies may be of particular relevance:

• The Data Protection Act - which is largely concerned with the use of personal data.

• The Copyright Act - which is concerned to protect the intellectual property rights of information and creative works.

• The Tradeable Information Policy - which aims to encourage the development of an information industry by pump-priming it with government held data.

• The Open Government Code of Practice on Access to Government Information - which underpins the private citizen’s right of access to non sensitive information held by the government.

• A variety of Local Government Acts which define the statutory requirements for local authorities to collect, publish and make available information required in the performance of their duties.

Each of these have arisen at different times, and each seeks to address a different aspect of information availability. During the recent AGI/IGGI discussions it became apparent that inconsistencies are perceived by government departments, and it remains unresolved whether the Government’s concerns are more focused on "Open Government" and freedom of information, or protecting copyright/commercial interests and controlling dissemination.

Whilst the Open Government Code of Practice on Access to Government Information supports rights of access to information, it only concerns private individuals and not the supply of information to commercial and other organisations to support value added services.

7 THE POSSIBLE SCOPE OF THE UK COALITION FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION

It will clearly be necessary during the "brainstorming" session to determine the scope of interests and activities for any UK CPI. For example:

• It may be argued that the Canadian model concentrates too heavily on the information superhighway, although it is this area of information which is currently stimulating much of the debate. Should the UK CPI widen its interests to take explicit cognisance of other delivery mechanisms, such as multimedia, or traditional paper based dissemination?

• It may be argued that the Canadian model focuses too heavily on the technologies that surround information dissemination. Should the UK CPI focus more on the content and in particular the role of the UK Government and the EC in promoting initiatives through making their own information available both directly and via value added services?

• Who should be members of such a coalition? Information users? Private individuals? ‘Watchdogs’? Information providers and resellers? Government and government departments?

• What activities should the coalition undertake? Direct lobbying? Publicising and coordinating the lobbying activities of member groups? Providing a central repository of information? The production of publications? Promoting public discussion of ‘key’ topics? Publicising and promoting relevant conferences? Organising its own conferences?

• How should the coalition be organised? What resources can be made available? How can it be funded?

Once again, the Canadian model provides some suggestions.

• Membership - The Canadian CPI has both individual and organisational members.

• Lobbying - The Canadian CPI has direct representation on their Federal Government’s National Information Highway Advisory Council and on a number of other high level bodies.

• Steering Committee - The Canadian CPI has established a steering committee with members from the private, non-profit, and public sectors.

• Working Groups - The Canadian CPI has established a number of working groups such as: funding; communications; membership; and policy development.

• Dissemination - The Canadian CPI supports an ongoing national electronic discussion forum on the Internet.

• Conferences - The Canadian CPI holds regular public meetings and forums.

• Publicity - The Canadian CPI achieves extensive, frequent media coverage.

• Funding comes primarily from subscriptions, but also receives sponsorship from interested organisations, including for example IBM Canada. The Coalition has also received government grants to help with administration and promotion. Running costs for the Canadian CPI are about $150,000 (Canadian) per annum.