Re: Fw: New push for privatisation of UK trading funds?

[Tracey P. Lauriault-2]

Hey gang!
Prepared the list below for jo.  some good stuff for us to look at to.

also, if any of you have come across some docs to answer her question
below please forward them along to us and her!

Cheers
t

also some good stuff here!
http://civicaccess.ca/wiki/Politiques/

Tracey P. Lauriault wrote:

> Hey jo
>
> here is what i have got, should get you started. Let me know if you
> have more questions.
>
> nice blurb on geobase
> http://www.geobase.ca/geobase/en/about/faq.html;jsessionid=AB18BA3851A7366CD51022862C6D9D5C#benefits 
>
> http://www.geobase.ca/geobase/en/about/index.html
>
> http://technology.guardian.co.uk/weekly/story/0,,1840386,00.html
> http://www.carl-abrc.ca/projects/nrc/mli-e.html
>
> http://geogratis.cgdi.gc.ca/geogratis/en/index.html
> not all but a bunch, and this got people thinkin'
>
> http://www.geoconnections.org/CGDI.cfm/fuseaction/data.free/gcs.cfm
> a list of free stuff
>
> http://www.geoconnections.org/CGDI.cfm/fuseaction/webServices.type/gcs.cfm 
>
> geoconnections free services
>
> http://www.geoconnections.org/CGDI.cfm/fuseaction/developersCorner.welcome/gcs.cfm 
>
> Data sharing improves data integrity and lowers costs
>
> this doc does not discuss free data per se but discusses the
> significant cost savings associated with adhering to open and
> intereoperable standards
> http://www.geoconnections.org/publications/tvip/arch_E/CGDI_Architecture_final_E.pdf 
>
>
> I luv these guys
> http://www.communityaccounts.ca/CommunityAccounts/OnlineData/about_us.asp
>
> not a perfect model but one of them
> http://www.statcan.ca/english/Dli/dli.htm
>
> not all the scales you want but not bad
> http://atlas.nrcan.gc.ca/site/english/dataservices/free_data.html/document_view 
>
>
> very general stuff here, some talk about creative commons for data -
> see the toc on license
> *http://www.collectionscanada.ca/cdis/012033-610-e.html#k*
>
> National academies of science report
> http://newton.nap.edu/catalog/11030.html#toc
>
> International Council for Science (ICSU) - bit on science data
> http://www.icsu.org/1_icsuinscience/DATA_IPR_1.html
>
> a debate doc
> http://www.oxera.com/cmsDocuments/Agenda_Oct%2005/Public%20information%20private%20profit.pdf 
>
>
> my favorite - science commons
> http://sciencecommons.org/
>
>
> Jo Walsh wrote:
>> dear Tracey,
>>
>> The news doesn't get much better here; INSPIRE will be full of
>> exemptions; particularly one stating that it only applies to public
>> authorities or work contracted by them for which there is an existing
>> legal reporting obligation to collect or disseminate the data.
>> Meanwhile the Treasury is preparing for a massive selloff of the
>> Trading Funds, particularly the OS, Met Office & Hydrographic Office.
>>
>> As Rufus says, this [[ highlights the need for us to try and get
>> together as much solid evidence as we can on the social and
>> commercial value of an open approach. ]]
>>
>> I have been holding up GeoConnections as an example of an agency doing
>> it right, or trying to. At this point I think we are crying out for
>> any specific supporting studies - more recent and more detailed than
>> the KPMG and PIRA ones - that could be used to add weight to a case.
>>
>> cheers,
>>
>>
>> jo
>> ----- Forwarded message from Roger Longhorn <[hidden email]> -----
>>
>> Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:28:56 +0100
>> Subject: New push for privatisation of UK trading funds?
>>
>> According to the news article link courtesy of Mike Blakemore
>> (below), several UK agencies are apparently being readied for full
>> privatisation by Gordon Brown (UK's next Prime Minister?, now
>> Chancellor of Exchequer) - including UK Hydrograqphic Office, Met
>> Office, and other trading funds.
>> /
>> "The Ministry of Defence is being asked to examine the scope for
>> privatising the Met Office and other arm???s-length businesses in the
>> wake of the Chancellor???s ambitious plan to raise £30 billion from
>> state sell-offs in the next five years.
>>
>> /
>>
>> /The MoD???s UK Hydrographic Office, Defence Aviation Repair Agency
>> and the defence engineering business, Abro, are also seen as possible
>> privatisation candidates. /
>>
>> /Along with the Met Office, they have been converted into so-called
>> trading funds ??? arm???s-length businesses run on semi-commercial
>> lines and expected to make a return on capital and contribute a
>> dividend to the Exchequer.
>>
>> /
>>
>> /All government departments are being ordered to come up with assets
>> that could be sold. Those with trading fund status ??? the mapping
>> body, the Ordnance Survey, is another ??? are considered closest to
>> being ready for life in the private sector."/
>>
>> Some even more interesting times ahead for geospatial data in the UK?
>> Wonder what this would do to a national UK SDI Strategy.
>>
>> A fully privatised former government body, such as QinetiQ, once the
>> Defense Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) - MODs main research
>> laboratories, now wholly owned by the Carlyle Group (European
>> Chairman, one former Prime Minister, John Major!), would fall
>> completely outside any regulatory requirements relating to
>> "government" as they would no longer even have government oversight,
>> - including, one presumes, INSPIRE, PSI Directive, etc.?
>>
>> Article 3 of the Directive defines "public authorities", to which the
>> Directive's rules would apply, as:
>>
>> (9) ???public authority??? means:
>>
>> (a) any government or other public administration, including public
>> advisory bodies, at national, regional or local level;
>>
>> (b) any natural or legal person performing public administrative
>> functions under national law, including specific duties, activities
>> or services in relation to the environment; and
>>
>> (c) any natural or legal person having public responsibilities or
>> functions, or providing public services relating to the environment
>> under the control of a body or
>> person falling within (a) or (b);
>>
>> Member States may provide that when bodies or institutions are acting
>> in a judicial or legislative capacity, they are not to be regarded as
>> a public authority for the purposes of this Directive;
>>
>> <ends>
>>
>> The only definition that might apply to a new, wholly privatised,
>> mapping agency such as OS GB, might be (b) above, or maybe (c), if
>> the privatised agency were still required, by law, to produce certain
>> levels of national mapping for regulatory purposes, etc. However,
>> these definitions are so tenuous, that they could be debated in
>> courts of law for years to come.
>>
>> On the other hand, once (if?) an NMA such as OS GB was wholly
>> privatised, then it would certainly face the same competition
>> regulations that now apply to all commercial ventures and it would be
>> difficult to see how the government could legally require that *only*
>> data from "OS plc" could or should be used for legal purposes if any
>> other commercial competitor could offer competing spatial data
>> resources of comparable quality. The information market might be well
>> and truly opened with such a move, but of course we could kiss
>> goodbye to any more thought of access to free national mapping data,
>> since no one expects a commercial entity to offer its primary
>> product(s) for free.
>>
>> Kind regards
>>
>> Roger
>> [hidden email]
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>>
>> http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,16849-2492961,00.html
>>
>> ---------------------------------------
>> Professor Michael Blakemore. Director I-DRA Ltd.
>> and Emeritus Professor of Geography, University of Durham
>> 31 Peterborough Road, Newton Hall, Durham DH1 5QX, UK
>> Office/Home [phone] Mobile [phone]
>> Voicemail & Fax [phone]
>> _http://www.ccegov.eu/ <http://www.ccegov.eu/>_
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>>
>>  
>
>