A new Report from the Science and Technology Committee has
concluded that the Government must improve its digital
capabilities in order to enhance the relationship between the
citizen and the State.
Leadership
Leadership of the digital Government agenda and a loss of
momentum in advancing this agenda were recurrent themes in the
evidence received during our inquiry.
The Committee concludes that political leadership in digitisation
has been lacking in recent years since left his role as
Minister for the Cabinet Office during the Coalition Government.
This, coupled with the departure of senior Civil Service figures
in GDS, has resulted in a slowing in the Government's digital
momentum, as evidenced by other countries overtaking the UK in
international rankings.
Concerns were also raised about the role of the Government
Digital Service. Although GDS made good progress in its early
years on standards and platforms that applied across Government,
the Committee heard that the service’s role had become
increasingly unclear and that it lacked the authority to
encourage the necessary change across departments.
To tackle these challenges this Report
recommends:
- · that the
Government should introduce a ministerial digital champion in
every department by the end of 2019 who has responsibility for
using innovation and digitisation to transform the way their
department operates; and
- · GDS's
purpose should be twofold: to provide advice to departments when
needed, but also to devise and enforce minimum standards
consistently across Government digital services.
Data Sharing
Throughout this inquiry, the Committee heard that data is the key
to ensuring that digital Government can be effective and
transformative. If shared properly between departments, it can
produce more efficient public services that work for the citizen,
thus improving the citizen-Government relationship.
This Report explores the case study of Estonia and concludes that
the UK Government could learn important lessons from the way
Estonia uses data to improve its public services. For example,
the Estonian state ensures that all data is shareable between
departments and every citizen has a single unique identifier in
which they can view all the data that the Government has about
them, as well as which departments have accessed their data, and
why.
This Report highlights the steps that the Government has already
taken to enhance public trust in data use and improve data
sharing between departments, including the establishment of the
Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation and the announcement of a
National Data Strategy.
However, the Committee is concerned that the Government does not
understand citizen’s views on how their data should be used. The
Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) should
ensure that the Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation annually
assesses public opinion on Government data use.
Legacy Systems
Legacy IT systems present a significant barrier to effective
Government transformation and digitisation. While the Committee
acknowledges the attempts of the Government, its predecessors and
individual departments to produce guidance and deal with legacy
issues, the same problems frequently recur, suggesting that the
Government and Government Digital Service's advice has not been
fully implemented.
This Report recommends that GDS conduct an audit of all legacy
systems across Government, including where they are based, what
actions to take, the expected cost of such action and the
resulting timescales. The Treasury must resource this action
adequately.
Rt Hon , Chair of the Science and
Technology Committee, said:
“The potential that digital Government can bring is huge:
transforming the relationship between the citizen and the State,
saving money and making public services more efficient and agile.
However, it is clear that the current digital service offered by
the Government has lost momentum and is not transforming the
citizen-State relationship as it could.
“Single unique identifiers can transform the efficiency and
transparency of Government services. The Government should ensure
there is a national debate on single unique identifiers for
citizens to use when accessing public services along with the
right of the citizen to know exactly what the Government is doing
with their data. In the UK, we have no idea when and how
Government departments are accessing and using our data. We could
learn from the very different relationship between citizen and
the state in Estonia.
“As well as a lack of leadership, we also heard of skill
shortages and legacy systems, which increase the risk of cyber
security attacks. But addressing these challenges requires money
and the Government must be willing to invest to save in the
future.
“The Government must re-address its approach to digitisation
quickly if it wants to retain public trust and its envied
position on the world stage.”
