Getting on with Government 2.0 - Department of Finance and ...

Box 12: Reducing metadata paralysis by choosing simpler metadata sets
It is acknowledged that metadata assists with search, discovery and access for data sets. However, in the
case of spatial data, a certain level of ‘metadata paralysis’ can be observed where some agencies focus
on completing a full metadata record as an absolute prerequisite before publication of the data set. This
reduces the speed with which data is made available to the public.
SIBA recommends mandating the use of minimal metadata requirements for spatial datasets as one of
the key mechanisms for making more government data searchable and usable, including legacy data.
SIBA also recommends the use of standards based metadata capture and access capabilities and related
tools, which reduce the effort to create metadata.
Information supplied to the taskforce by the Spatial Industries Business Association
(Australia) (SIBA).
5.6 Clearing the hurdles: freeing up PSI
The call in our terms of reference for the establishment of ‘a pro-disclosure culture around
non-sensitive public sector information’ is straightforward enough. Yet as demonstrated below,
the list of objections that might be made to the release of PSI — reasons for arguing that this
particular piece of information is not ‘non-sensitive’ — is virtually endless. At any stage public
decision makers may be tempted to play it safe.
The new policy of openness must be overseen by an agency with sufficient authority and
independence to ensure that each decision which might obstruct the free flow government
information is informed. 209
5.6.1 Perceived obstacles to open release of PSI
For PSI to be successfully released today it must clear the following hurdles:
●●
●●
●●
For someone to access PSI they must know of its existence and location. Yet agencies often
have no systematic knowledge of all the data they hold and to the extent that they do,
they have not been required to make such knowledge available to the public in a register. If
information is known to the agency it may not be known to those outside the agency who
might find it useful. Most obviously if its existence has not already been published, there
may be the need for permission for those outside agencies to have its existence and location
divulged.
Even if its existence is publicly known, the institutions of government ensure that secrecy
is the default. Thus public officials face sanctions ranging from subtle disapproval through
to reprimand and ultimately jail sentences for releasing information without authorisation,
generally irrespective of the merits of release.
Releasing information must also be consistent with domestic and national security
considerations and with privacy laws.
209 There are many occasions where some principle is endorsed, but remains largely unimplemented. Thus for instance
in 1986 the Prime Minister, Bob Hawke, announced a rigorous new process of regulatory impact assessment.
However the then Office of Regulation Review did not report on compliance with the policy by department. In the
absence of this accountability, the policy was fully complied with in only 8 per cent of cases even after the policy
had been announced and operating for a decade. Industry Commission report, 1997, Regulation and its Review
1996–97, p. 41 Table 3.2.
Engage: <strong>Getting</strong> on with Government 2.0 | report of the government 2.0 taskforce
49