Government Data Sharing framework: The Open Government Ninjas: Open New Zealand

I am thinking aloud here and would love to hear thoughts in this out there
think...

I have observed a great deal of time and effort spent (wasted?) on many data
sharing agreements between agencies, and during the #COVID response, seeking
approval to share data has taken too long in some cases.

So I'm picturing a way we can be more efficient, saving lots of time and money
as well as being far more responsive to emerging needs. The picture attached to
this post is made up of the follwing 5 elements:

1. Common expectation on information security and privacy protection (in NZ
through the Public Security Requirements, NZ Information Security Manual and
the Government Chief Privacy Officer)

2. Common data sharing agreement (a “Creative Commons” approach to data sharing
agreement between government agencies that are covered by the mandate in #1)

3. Public register of data being shared across government – including source
agency, destination agency, description of data, general purpose (separate
record for each purpose).

4. API gateways – the capability to rapidly (automatically or on demand)
transfer data between agencies - as per register.

5. Data standards and content requirements (interoperability).

Any thoughts?...

Cheers,
Paul

GovDataSharing.JPG 69.69kb

Hi Paul,

Adding here just in case it is relevant for others also.

Would the Stats Act or the Privacy Act restrict any of this?

I’d be inclined to suggest that it should be mandatory for _all_ Govt data to
be held in the NZStats IDI and auto-linked to the same entity in different
datasets. Thus it is not a case of Depts deciding to upload or transfer, it is
a case of use-cases gaining approval from a suitably independent authority to
use the linked data. In other words the IDI becomes the Govt data cloud by
default. Depts may choose to download ‘their’ data for other uses, but why
would they need to?

Over time I would hope that the idea of Depts ‘owning’ data would evaporate -
it is the nation’s data to which they have access for public service purposes.

Having NZStats or some other non-govt, non-commercial entity as the data trust
might help the argument?

I realise there are all sort of practical and political challenges in this
but…well, you did ask :-)

regards
Ben

> In other words the IDI becomes the Govt data cloud by default.

Always super sceptical of one platform to rule them all - the long tail of data
variety will kill any such attempt.

For example, I think Stats might not appreciate having to suddenly manage and
link the ~2.5 Pb of technical geoscience data our branch of MBIE holds, let
alone the geological samples and archives.

> Would the Stats Act or the Privacy Act restrict any of this?

Privacy act is usually the biggest barrier for us - you can’t just reuse some
kinds of previously collected data for another purpose without permission, even
where this might help (eg sharing information about mana whenua discussions
between agencies to support their aspirations).

And often there isn’t the motivation or budget to go back and get that
permission, even when the party concerned is still around to give it.

The challenge is to enable the sharing without slowing down everything in a
massive amount of process.

Sorting the authorising environment with up-front agreements is a good first
step - provided you can get it on the radar of the relevant leadership teams.
:)

I would be interested in what your playbook for discussions with leadership
would look like Paul. How would you get a mandate to enforce the change in work
practice by agencies needed at data capture to ensure privacy etc was
maintained for example? Could you link this to regulatory stewardship
aspiriations?

Jess,
What is the current process used to build or define the up-front agreements?
What options would there be for allowing re-use without concern?
In particular, if this was for sharing between agencies?

Does anyone maintain a register of what data is used for or contributes to?

Do you run a privacy impact assessment before you contemplate whether you need
to go back and request new permissions?

Rest of post

Ben - with you on the "Depts ‘owning’ data" front, my message to data champions
across govt and from the conference lectern has been that depts are custodians
of a public asset, and as such they have a responsibility to realise the
maximum value from that asset...

Re the IDI, I hear you but as Jess suggests, its a bit more complicated than
that. Even if you just took the social sector, you'd need a long term plan to
implement for everyone to be on board. Not impossible :)

Jess - I'm thinking the review of the NZ Data strategy and Roadmap may be an
avenue to get this raised and lead to a mandate and action... I will explore
that option - and I expect MBIE will be consulted at some point if you want to
add noise to the issue...

Caleb - at the moment MOUs or AISA's are devloped and approved, which can be
slow and resource hungry. And there is no public register across government. I
feel there should be as the public should know where their data is going. It
would also be helpful to govt employees also to know what is going where. A
public register would be an import part of build trust in the government data
system. The OGP National Action Plan could be a pathway to getting action on
that front (just a suggestion ;)

Also - good question re privacy impact assessments Caleb, these should still be
carried out. And perhaps also the planned sharing of data should be reviewed
using Nga Tikanga Paihere, a framework for considering cultural impact - at
https://data.govt.nz/use-data/data-ethics/nga-tikanga-paihere/

Government Data Sharing framework

Already a member?

Not a member?