[open-government] Defining Open Government Data?

[Javier Ruiz]

I am checking with our legal advisory board if UK is similar, but I think we
have a different system. Someone was telling me that even a joint body set
up by two local authorities would be exempt from FOIA. I will get back to
the list with confirmed advice.


2010/11/15 Katleen Janssen <Katleen.Janssen at law.kuleuven.be>

> The ‘privatization of data’ through outsourcing can be a concern, but there
> are some examples where the definition of ‘public authority’ subject to the
> FOI legislation should be broad enough to cover these types of outsourcing
> deals.
>
>
>
> For instance, the Belgian legislation includes bodies that have been
> entrusted by a ‘real’ public body with a service performed in the public
> interest. The European directive on environmental information should
> probably also be broad enough to cover these situations.
>
>
>
> Is the UK definition not broad enough to cover this?
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> katleen
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* open-government-bounces at lists.okfn.org [mailto:
> open-government-bounces at lists.okfn.org] *On Behalf Of *Tony Kennick
> *Sent:* maandag 15 november 2010 13:01
> *To:* open-government at lists.okfn.org
>
> *Subject:* Re: [open-government] Defining Open Government Data?
>
>
>
>
>
> 2010/11/15 Javier Ruiz <javier at openrightsgroup.org>
>
> One of the key improvements to this area would be to extend the FoI
> obligations to private companies doing public works.
>
>
>
> Any such extension would need careful drafting so it couldn't be used by
> competitors to dig out data from parts of any such company.
>
>
>
>  The amount of "public data" could almost disappear in cases such as
> Suffolk council in UK, which plan to outsource every single service
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11398678. Even the remaining info on
> contracting would likely be denied on commercial confidentiality grounds.
>
>
>
> The governments plans for data to be opened up so the public can directly
> assess the performance of local authorities only makes sense if it doesn't
> matter whether the council provides services directly or by contracting
> out. Whole swathes of data publishing will need to be set out in contracts
> as a required as part of the service delivery.
>
>
>
> --
>
> Tony Kennick
>
> Technophobia Limited.
>
> The Workstation
>
> 15 Paternoster Row
>
> SHEFFIELD
>
> England
>
> S1 2BX
>
> Phone: +44 (0)114 2212123  Fax: +44 (0)114 2212124
>
> Email: tony at technophobia.co.uk
>
> WWW: http://www.technophobia.com
>
> Twitter: @WeTechnoPhobia
>
> Registered in England and Wales Company No. 3063669
>
> VAT registration No. 598 7858 42
>
> ISO 9001:2000 Accredited Company No. 21227
>
> ISO 14001:2004 Accredited Company No. E997
>
> ISO 27001:2005 (BS7799) Accredited Company No. IS 508906
>
> Investor in People Certified No. 101507
>
>
>
> The contents of this email are confidential to the addressee and are
>
> intended solely for the recipients use. If you  are not the addressee, you
>
> have received this email in error. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or
>
> action taken  in reliance on it is prohibited and may be unlawful.
>
>
>
> Any opinions expressed in this email are those of the author personally and
>
> not TechnoPhobia Limited who do not  accept responsibility for the contents
>
> of the message.
>
>
>
> All email communications, in and out of TechnoPhobia, are recorded for
>
> monitoring purposes.
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-government mailing list
> open-government at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-government
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-government/attachments/20101116/da9545bb/attachment-0001.html>