An interesting article on the BBC site today. It is all to easy to blog away criticising any part of government or the "establishment" in general without ever stopping to make well thought through suggestions for a different approach.
Substitute OS for government/establishment and perhaps some of their most vociferous critics should be reading this article. Interestingly Mathew Taylor (Tony Blair's retiring strategy advisor) whose views are quoted in the article is leaving to head up the Royal Society for the Arts who recently hosted the very vociferous Free Our Data debate
Online booking system is being tested
-
Our online booking system, RegOnline is now set-up for AGI GeoCommunity '10
and is being tested. AGI has used this booking 'engine' with great success
sinc...
7 comments:
Well, the RSA agrees with the Free Our Data campaign's aims. And we have made our case, as far as we can given the Treasury's reluctance to perform the study it said in 2000 should be carried out: find out how much private-sector business would follow from making public data free.
Plus the OFT has now reported and reckons that public sector charges drag the economy down by at least £1 bn. That's a lot of missed tax revenues, eh? Particularly since the OS only brings in £50m from the private sector: that's £250m of extra private sector business needed to generate the tax revenues that would cover the cost.
Charles
I am not sure that the RSA does agree with FOD's aims. RSA hosted a debate on the subject which is not the same as saying that the organisation supports your campaign aims.
The OFT has estimated that £1bn of GDP could be released across the whole PSI sector - OS has operating costs of ca.£110m, if those costs were to be covered by the additional tax revenues they would represent nearer to £500m of GDP (half of the estimated gain!) unless you are proposing a part funded model where the government pays half of OS operating costs in return for free access to the data and commercial users get it for free. Of course when private sector companies then try to sell the data to the public sector we could end up paying twice!
As I see it Charles there are two alternatives to the current trading fund model:
1. The treasury commits to fully funding OS from taxation and the data is available to everyone for free with full exploitation rights
2. The treasury gets hacked off with all of this argument and decides to privatise OS in which case they get a one off lump sum into their coffers and everyone would then have to pay for the data which probably doesn't achieve your aims of stimulating lots of new economic activity and will certainly increase the costs of the public sector users of the data.
First: the RSA is certainly in alignment with the FOD aims; that's why they got in touch to host the debate. I really didn't have to push them at all.
Secondly, the OS's operating costs might be £110m, but more than half of its revenues, which more than cover that (see this week's Guardian FOD story) come from local government. So in terms of taxpayer-funded income, the OS requires £50m-odd: ending the licensing from local government would free £50m of cash from local authorities.
So now we need to find an aggregate of £50m of taxes from newly-generated in general private-sector activity to make up for not letting the OS charge.
That equates, at the 20% corporation tax, to £250m of extra activity - more than covered by the OFT's estimate. And the OS is by far the largest trading fund.
Yes, I agree that there are two possible outcomes - we like (1) but equally can see that (2) is possible, because some governments are incorrigibly stupid, not to mention unable to see a good thing when it's facing them. But there's a strong national interest argument for keeping OS out of private hands (though one might have thought that too about Qinetiq..)
Yes, the private sector might - almost certainly would - begin selling back public data to LAs. But there would be competition. Isn't that meant to drive prices down when there's equal access to content?
Still don't see why hosting a debate means that the RSA are in agreement with one of the sides but let's park that.
I lost you on the LG payments to OS? I don't think the LG payment to OS is half of their revenue, that is the total payment from public sector. Even so if LG and other PS don't pay the money to OS who will? The treasury? Do you think that the treasury is going to say to LG "we will pay your contributions directly to OS and we will leave your grants unaltered"? Not going to happen - so no cash freed up in LG.
I doubt you will get the treasury to go for option 1 and if they did funding would decrease at the first budget crisis. We both have reservations about option 2. I remain of the opinion that improving the working of the Trading Fund model represents the most pragmatic option.
RSA thoughts on FOD: personal communication with comment author :-)
But it's not relevant to this point.
OK, it's public sector that makes up more that half of the OS receipts, not just local government.
OK, Treasury won't pay grants directly to OS. But PS isn't paying £50m now so it's available for them to spend on other stuff. Do you really think that Treasury will be able to chase down that £50m? It's not going to make a big difference to council tax bills downwards.. but what difference would being able to do *anything* *for free* with map data, postcode data and so on do to websites and general services?
Yes, I recognise the dangers of a Treasury that will think that you can just dump OS (and other agencies') funding. It needs an OS (and other agencies') charter that amounts to a contract for them to deliver mapping, and government to fund it.
"It needs an OS (and other agencies') charter that amounts to a contract for them to deliver mapping, and government to fund it."
That looks to me to be a very close description of NIMSA and look how secure that turned out to be as a revenue stream.
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,A片,A片,情色,A片,A片,情色,A片,A片,情趣用品,A片,情趣用品,A片,情趣用品,a片,情趣用品
A片,A片,AV女優,色情,成人,做愛,情色,AIO,視訊聊天室,SEX,聊天室,自拍,AV,情色,成人,情色,aio,sex,成人,情色
免費A片,美女視訊,情色交友,免費AV,色情網站,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人影片,成人網站,H漫,18成人,成人圖片,成人漫畫,情色網,日本A片,免費A片下載,性愛
情色文學,色情A片,A片下載,色情遊戲,色情影片,色情聊天室,情色電影,免費視訊,免費視訊聊天,免費視訊聊天室,一葉情貼圖片區,情色視訊,免費成人影片,視訊交友,視訊聊天,言情小說,愛情小說,AV片,A漫,AVDVD,情色論壇,視訊美女,AV成人網,成人交友,成人電影,成人貼圖,成人小說,成人文章,成人圖片區,成人遊戲,愛情公寓,情色貼圖,色情小說,情色小說,成人論壇
免費A片,日本A片,A片下載,線上A片,成人電影,嘟嘟成人網,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,微風成人區,成人文章,成人影城
A片,A片,A片下載,做愛,成人電影,.18成人,日本A片,情色小說,情色電影,成人影城,自拍,情色論壇,成人論壇,情色貼圖,情色,免費A片,成人,成人網站,成人圖片,AV女優,成人光碟,色情,色情影片,免費A片下載,SEX,AV,色情網站,本土自拍,性愛,成人影片,情色文學,成人文章,成人圖片區,成人貼圖
Post a Comment