Thank you very much David and thank you for inviting me to participate in the ‘currency of digital economy’ conference.
It is fitting to be discussing the digital economy at a conference convened by the National Archives – one of Australia’s most important historical and cultural institutions. The archives have been described as the ‘memory of our nation’ not only collecting and preserving Australian Government records that reflect our history and identity but, more importantly, putting them into context – the archives’ collection traces the events and decisions that have shaped the nation and the lives of all Australians.
For all of human history, we have tried to remember - to preserve human knowledge, to hold on to our memories, and we have devised numerous means to do so. We had to go to great efforts to remember in times past, whether it was painting on a cave wall, memorising ballads, writing things down, painting pictures, taking photographs... or more formalised institutions, such as archives and libraries, where memories were carefully stored, catalogued and analysed. Of course these institutionalized practices of selecting, classifying, preserving and mediating knowledge has had a profound impact on the way society remembers and indeed the way it forgets.
The digital revolution - the Internet - means that this default of forgetting is no longer the case. Now as more and more of our lives are lived or at least recorded online, in large part at our own initiative, is anything able to be forgotten? Things can be overlooked certainly, but can they ever be deleted?
These questions are not merely for academics, curators or philosophers. Two weeks ago the European Court of Justice, the European Union’s highest court, issued a ruling on the “right to be forgotten,” which grants users of Google the right to have links about themselves removed from Google’s search results. The decision applies to nearly anything found on the Internet— legal records, photos, even lawfully published news stories—and, in the words of the European Justice Commissioner, Viviane Reding, represents “a clear victory for the protection of the personal data of Europeans.”
This debate around called ‘right to be forgotten’, has become increasingly relevant in the post-Snowden world.
It raises a number of important questions:
- Did the court go far enough – is it enough to say that you should be removed from the Google search results?
- Should there be a right to go back into the primary web pages and resources and have yourself removed from those?
- Will search engines be inundated with requests to remove links to content?
- And perhaps more importantly, is the ruling enforceable or practical at all? How would it wash in a country like Australia with a stronger tradition of free speech, let alone in the First Amendment culture of the United States? It seems to me to have no prospect of washing there at all. It may be seen as a rather eccentric judgement in time. But nonetheless it raises many important issues:
- And these questions about the comprehensive and perpetual memory of the Internet raise important practical and philosophical questions about the role and future of institutions such as archives, libraries and museums. It is my belief that such institutions are more important than ever. When everything is remembered there is an even greater need for institutions to help us contextualise our memories and understand the important things.
For all of human history when the default was to forget a lot of important things we forgotten, many important records were lost. But to the extent things were remembered one of the criteria that ensured remembering was the significance of the event or the impact of memory. But are we better off now? Now that everything is remembered do we run the risk of losing the needle in the haystack?
For this reason, I am very pleased to see that the National Archives has been so active in in tackling the challenges of digital preservation, enabling access to digital, records, memories and information in the future. There are now almost 25 million digitised pages loaded on the Archives’ database. The coupling of digital records and search technology can help find the needle in the haystack.
The idea of overcoming the fallibility of human memory was forecast by HG Wells when, in the 1930s, he wrote an essay on the "world brain" through which "the whole human memory can be . . . made accessible to every individual". I suppose Google would say that they have realised that vision in their own search engine.
Today, every one of us has access, in our pockets, to a staggering amount of information that even just 10 years ago, much less 100 years ago, was unimaginable. The important issue now is how best to unlock, democratise and share this data.
The data explosion and implications for government
In 2013, the amount of stored information in the world was estimated to be around 1200 exabytes. This is the equivalent of giving every person living on Earth today 320 times as much information as is estimated to have been stored in the Library of Alexandria.
Much of this data is so large and complex – so called big data --that it would have been impossible to identify meaningful trends within it only a decade or so ago.
We can now draw new and meaningful insights from this messy, unstructured data due to the tremendous growth in processing power, and the relative affordability of storing and transmitting data.
In the last 50 years the cost of digital storage has halved roughly every two years, storage density has increased 50-million fold and our ability to process that data has increased exponentially, doubling every eighteen months.
This has led to an explosion in the volume of data available to consumers, to business and, of course, to government. And this easy-to-access data is mostly stored in a machine readable form -- a profound difference from techniques previously used to collect and store information in years past.
For governments, all this data has the capacity profoundly to change the way policy is formed.
Until recently, governments tended to see the data they collected as a by-product of what they do instead of as an initiator of what they can do. Although governments considered data valuable and had a special position in capturing information they were not particularly effective at using it. Now, rather than simply record of what we have done, data can and should drive what we will do. Today, all data is recognised as valuable, in and of itself.
But data is a latent resource. It does not reveal its benefits easily; they are only discovered through analysis.
The reality is that government is probably not always the best placed to do the necessary analysis, to understand what it has. This means to extract the most value from data held by government we need to make it readily available to the private sector and citizens - to make it truly open. There is no value to government or to society, to hold onto this information, to store it unused in a dusty, locked digital cupboard somewhere. It’s the private sector, the innovators, the questioning citizens who are best placed to unleash and harness the value locked in the data.
Economic potential of open and accessible data
Apart from the social benefits, what is the economic rationale in making this data open and accessible? The argument of direct costs versus indirect benefits is a difficult proposition for governments with shrinking budgets. It calls for mature cost-benefit analysis that includes factors that relate to the broader digital economy.
A 2013 report by McKinsey researchers estimates $3 to 5 trillion in economic value annually from open data across seven sectors in the United States. More locally, John Houghton from the Centre for Strategic and Economic Studies found that the net cost to the Australia Bureau of Statistics of making publications and statistics freely available and adopting creative commons licensing was about $3.5 million a year – but the benefits to the public, to government, were even greater. The immediate costs savings to users was around $5 million per annum and the measurable annualised benefits were around $25 million.
We like to think of sites like Google, Amazon and Facebook as the pioneers of big data, but of course governments were the original gatherers of information on a mass scale, and they still rival any private enterprise for the sheer volume of data they control.
Ironically, despite their special position in capturing information -- governments are the only institution or organisation that can compel people to provide it – governments are often ineffective at using it. Yes, much of this information might be personal or confidential (tax returns, health records and so forth) but, more often than not, it is government's lack of imagination and absence of incentives to exploit the great value from data that is to blame.
I am pleased to say we are improving rapidly in our openness to data. We have already seen some fantastic uses of government data to create real time apps. One of my favourites as a keen catcher of public transport is the NSW transport app, TripView, which allows the public to track the exact time of arrival in real time of a bus or train from their nearest stop. This is only possible thanks to the innovative use of real time government data. And it has a profound impact. Because, as any transit economist will tell you, the real challenge for mass transit in terms of broad mass acceptance is being sufficiently regular that citizen or a passenger can turn up to a bus stop or a train station an know that a train will turn up or a bus will turn up in a reasonable time. All the experts, such as Peter Newmann, will tell you that. This type of application changes that paradigm because it means that you know precisely when the train or bus is going to be there. It makes mass transit, at no cost to government, much more attractive.
At the Commonwealth Government level the establishment of data.gov.au and the publication of the Principles on Open Public Sector Information (PSI) have been important steps in opening up the data held by government agencies for re-use.
The current Australian Government's Principles on open public sector information state that open access should be our default position.
A recent Commonwealth dataset that’s worth mentioning is the 2014 Budget. The complete Budget information was made available in machine readable form through data.gov.au for the first time. Another is the Australian Disaster Events datasets – a CSV file that maps disaster events in Australia by category, impact and geographic location. The benefits to business, to government, to innovate using this information, this data, is significant – it allows a level of analysis that has not previously possible.
I’m absolutely committed to ensuring that the data that we are releasing has the potential to add value – genuine value that enables companies to deliver real innovations. For this reason my department is leading a senior working group to identify datasets of high-value to the economy. We have identified more than 20 such datasets, covering areas such as geocoded addressing, finance, energy and infrastructure – and the data will be anonymised, where necessary to protect privacy.
But we also need to be upfront and recognise that we can do more and, to this end, we are making good progress. So far, 85 per cent of the data that is available through data.gov.au has been added since the Coalition was elected in September. This is the direct result of my department, the Department of Communications, working with Geoscience Australia and the Finance portfolio to deliver on our election commitments in our e-Government the Digital Economy.
Longer term, governments' involvement in collecting, storing and maintaining data will depend on a number of factors, including cost, market capability, and legal and security issues.
One early example of open datasets that once opened will have both significant economic and efficiency dividends is the Geocoded National Address File or G-NAF.
As well as having significant utility within the private sector the file is also fundamental to government business. It currently incurs significant licencing and administration costs in addition to the restrictive licencing hampering government business. It is our goal to foster more collaboration between the private and public sectors to ensure that datasets such as G-NAF are available to foster more value added services and efficiencies.
The open data network is one of the key ways that the Departments of Communications and Finance are delivering on the Commonwealth Open Data agenda.
An example of how the open data network will provide assistance to the research and not-for-profit sector is the NationalMap functionality that my Department, in collaboration with NICTA and Geoscience Australia, will release at GovHack this year.
Using open source technology within the open data network, like the Cesium viewer that underpins the NationalMap, allows both the not-for-profit and for-profit sectors to use and build on open Government data.
The first iterations of this will be the network created by the linkages of data.gov.au with the FIND geospatial online catalogue, the NationalMap exploitation tool and two major data infrastructures, the Foundation Spatial Data Framework and the National Environmental Infrastructure Initiative.
It was this policy of promoting M2M networked infrastructures that delivered an additional 2300 datasets to data.gov.au in January this year from only one additional Government agency. My Department is currently taking this test case to other Departments to replicate that success.
Big Data Opportunities
Of course it is not simply the Government’s job to release the data it controls – in many instances the Government is well placed to analyse ‘big data’ and draw value from the data it collects. There are already many big data projects underway in areas such as the Australian Tax Office; and in Departments including Immigration, Industry and Defence.
For example, the Department of Immigration and Border control performs big data analytics on visas and border risks that previously would have been impossible. In the last three years the Department has processed more than 100 million visa applications and passenger cards, 500 million border crossings, 500 million alert lists and records over one million over-stayers and non-compliant visa holders.
The Big Data Centre of Excellence within the ATO and the Department of Finance’s private/public partnership project will also assist in the prioritisation of big data projects that have the greatest impact for service delivery agencies.
Government and the cloud
Along with the dramatic improvements in the way data can be collected and analysed there have been fundamental changes is the way data is stored and accessed.
No doubt, the benefits of cloud computing are well realised in the room. Cloud computing is fundamentally changing the way we think about computing. Although I should note the metaphor of the cloud is not a fortunate one, because it does create in a lot of people minds the idea of somewhere that is evanescent, and insecure and vague as opposed to the box in your office or department. And the reality is the cloud is just a bigger box that is generally better managed and more secure. But nonetheless it is too late – the cloud is the metaphor.
The Coalition government is doing its bit to get small businesses excited about the cloud. Last week my department – the department of Communications - released series of guides designed to help them embrace the trend with confidence. The guides have been developed on the back of the detailed Cloud Computing Regulatory Stock Take, which provides an overview of regulation affecting the Australian cloud market and its impact on take up.
The guides are designed to provide advice on the choice of cloud vendor, legal issues involved and how Australian Privacy Laws apply to the use of cloud services.
KPMG has estimated that increased adoption of cloud services in Australian firms could boost the Australian economy by $3.32 billion a year.
Transforming service delivery
Government is also using data to run agencies more efficiently and improve citizens’ online experience of government services. Based the on data collected from all government agencies about how citizens interact with government departments online the Coalition is transforming the way we use ICT to deliver services to the public – and we are making good progress.
By the end of 2017 all major services and interactions will be available to the public online, making government more accessible, more efficient – that is the cornerstone of our convenient services policy, which closely follows the work of the UK Government’s Digital Services division - GDS. I have recently returned from a trip to the UK where I spent a lot of time working with our counterparts, the Minister for the Cabinet Office, Francis Maude, and heads of GDS Liam Maxwell and Mike Bracken, who are producing inspiring changes and massive savings in the delivery of government digital services. Literally saving billions of pounds and making every aspect of government much more engaging more compelling and providing much more interaction with citizens. A real win-win. Mr Maxwell will be travelling to Australia soon to advise me and my government colleagues on how we can enact similar changes in service delivery across all government agencies.
In the UK the GDS has calculated that online transactions are 20 times cheaper than transactions over the phone, 30 times cheaper than postal transactions, and a staggering 50 times cheaper than face-to-face transactions. This is significant when you consider the situation in Australia – Last year there were about 156 million face-to-face interactions, 63 million phone interactions and nearly 220 million paper interactions, many of which were sent through the post.
But it’s important to recognise that designating the internet as the default customer service channel is much more than a cost-saving exercise. That is what our e-Government Policy is all about – it recognises that more than 80 per cent of Australians expect to be able to interact with government, to complete transactions, online. It is important that a digital interaction with government is digital end-to-end.
And like the recent National Commission of Audit, it recognises that the internet is the best way for both government to deliver services to the public and for the public to engage with government.
I am absolutely committed to this agenda and will making more announcements in the future.
As data transforms our lives – optimising, creating efficiencies, informing policy making and creating value – we are presented with just as many questions as the powerful number-crunching of data solves.
What is the value of traditional institutions, such as this one – the National Archives - whose role was to collect and analyse both physical and digital data?
What data should governments and corporations be permitted to collect and, once they have it, what should they be allowed to use it for?
Even if the data suggests a certain policy outcome is the most efficient and cost-effective - will it necessarily be the right one?
How are attitudes to privacy changing? In my own view – and I have to say this is ‘anec-data’ – the digital natives, generation Y and below, have a very different attitude to privacy than we do. A generation that is habituated with putting so much of their lives on Facebook and other platforms does have a very different attitude.
In reality data is not an ice-cold world of algorithms and automatons. There is an essential role for people, with all the limitations, inaccuracies, subjectivity and humanity that come with being human. With the help of institutions such as the National archives and Australia’s great museums and libraries and some of the world’s best data scientists we have a great opportunity. It is now the responsibly of us all, government, industry and the community more broadly to unleash the latent power of today’s modern information for a common social and economic good.
 Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, Delete: The Virtue of Forgetting in the Digital Age (Princeton University Press 2011).
 Attila Marton ‘Forgotten as Data – Remembering through the Information – Social Memory Institutions in the Digital Age’, 2011, 13.
 Jonathan Blitzer, ‘Google Search Results: Dictator Not Found’, New Yorker, 21 May 2014.
 H.G. Wells, ‘World Brain: The Idea of a Permanent World Encyclopedia’, World Brain (1937).
 Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, Big Data (John Murray 2013), 9.
 UK Government’s Digital Efficiency Report (Government Digital Services).
 ACMA’s Communications Report (2012-13).
 Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, Delete: The Virtue of Forgetting in the Digital Age (Princeton University Press 2011).