House of Commons - Responsible Use of Data - Science and Technology Committee

Responsible Use of Data - Science and Technology Committee Contents

3 Barriers to using social media data effectively

Data science skills in the UK

15. The benefits of using social media data will require the correct infrastructure to be in place, including the necessary hardware, good software and the right people. This section focuses on the availability of the necessary skills rather than the development of the hardware and software infrastructure, as evidence to the inquiry on infrastructure was generally positive and Government initiatives surrounding big data were described as good. There are, however, issues regarding the use of social media data in improving governance than for seeking economic benefits.

Data Science use in governance

16. We have received evidence that government organisations' use of social media data was inconsistent across the UK. With regard to their ability to utilise social media data during emergency events, Professor John Preston, University of East London, contrasted the differences between the local governments for London, Birmingham and Carlisle:

He reflected that the success in using social media within Government organisations ultimately depended upon the interest levels of officials.[37]

17. Sir Nigel Shadbolt, Web Science Trust, considered that, if social media data was to be used effectively within government, at both local and national levels, there was a need to investigate whether civil servants had the right "mix of skills".[38] We were told that there was a general shortage of people in the UK with the right mix of data science skills and techUK reported a risk that this shortage may be felt more acutely by public sector organisations, as "those with the required skills prefer to take roles within start-ups rather than in government or established business where skills are currently needed".[39] techUK thought that the "Government should have a programme of re-skilling to optimise opportunities".[40]

Data science skills outside Government

18. Sir Nigel informed us that there were many job opportunities for data scientists in the UK, "there was a survey just this year by Eurojobs.com that looked at the 6,000-odd jobs that mentioned the words "data" or "data science" in their title. Half of those—over 50%—came from Britain". He said that the "nearest EU competitor was Germany", which only hosted a 9% proportion of advertised jobs.[41]

19. Despite the abundant employment opportunities, there appears to be a distinct shortage of people with the right combination of skills to fill the job vacancies in data science in the UK. techUK considered there to be "a skills and educational gap which is creating [a] lack of data specialists in the UK" while Digital Science pinpointed "the most pressing deficit" to be "insight combined with technical talent".[42] Sureyya Cansoy, techUK, told us that e-skills UK, the sector skills council for information technology,[43] "expect big data job vacancies to grow by 23% annually by 2017" and that "techUK and e-skills predict that we will need another half a million [people skilled in data science] by 2020".[44] She also told us that currently "57% of recruiters dealing with big data vacancies say that it is difficult to find people for the jobs they are looking to hire for".[45] Timo Hannay, Digital Science, picked out a company, Altmetric, as an example which "currently has eleven staff but seven vacancies, of which five are technical—essentially developer and data analytics type roles".[46] He stated that the numbers give "some indication of the difficulty" that UK companies are having in getting the "high calibre of person" needed to fill such vacancies.[47]

20. Witnesses recognised that the Government had begun to take action on skills shortages in data science, producing Seizing the data opportunity: A strategy for UK data capability, a joint venture between the Government, the Information Economy Council, industry and academic institutions.[48] The Strategy identifies what proficiencies are needed by industry, where the gaps are, where action is needed and what needs to happen in schools, higher education and apprenticeships in terms of promoting the reputation of the industry.[49] The ESRC considered the Strategy an excellent starting point, but that strong leadership would be required to overcome barriers such as the development of data science expertise, pointing out that the rate at which the demand was growing "is not matched by increased investment in more comprehensive training and skills programmes".[50] We have noted that the Government is pursuing a number of plans to promote data science skills within the curriculum, including projects carried out in conjunction with e-skills. We are aware of projects such as the e-skills' BigAmbition website, aimed at 14-19 year olds,[51] or the CC4G (Computer Clubs for Girls) project,[52] both of which are set to have a positive impact on the future UK workforce. This Committee, in its report Educating tomorrow's engineers[53], has raised concerns about the Government's approach to developing engineering skills and to encouraging more students to embark on a technical career. The initiatives mentioned above demonstrate the type of input that can, and should, be encouraged.

21. We have seen repeatedly that the UK is not producing the technically proficient people required to support modern businesses. In our report, Educating Tomorrow's Engineers, we concluded that, despite the Government's recognition of the importance of engineering skills, there is a persistent gap in the numbers of engineers required to achieve economic growth. Data science is yet another skills area that urgently needs to be addressed if the UK is to be able to build an economy that can compete on the global stage. It is essential that the Government ensures that data science skills are promoted in educational institutions and within organisations that are able to provide data skills development.

22. We repeat our recommendation, from our report, Educating Tomorrow's Engineers, that learned societies, professional institutions and trade bodies put an obligation on their members to systematically engage in promoting data science skills through a structured programme of educational engagement. We request that the Government detail to us, in its response to this report, how it intends to ensure that organisations take part in a national effort to promote data science skills within the current and future UK workforce.

Framing the debate

23. Professor Liesbet van Zoonen, Loughborough University, told us that there was a disparity in how UK and continental European countries discussed issues related to data collection.[54] She said that in the UK, debate around collecting data from citizens was often defined in terms of a security framework (i.e. counter-terrorism or crime reduction) rather than improvements to Government services for the benefit of citizens. In contrast, the debate in Europe leans towards the improvement of services that can be derived from data.[55] According to Professor van Zoonen, this meant that the link between data sharing and better services was less apparent to UK citizens, who may also become less supportive of security-led data requirements once the initial security concern has abated.[56]

24. In the UK this attitude is demonstrated by the way in which the powers taken by the Government to address the threats of terrorism have subsequently been characterised as government snooping and breaching the privacy of citizens. In summer 2014, a number of national newspapers criticised GCHQ's access to social media data. The Mail Online reported that "GCHQ 'can spy on Facebook and YouTube users and has ability to manipulate online polls', latest Snowden leaks claim", whilst the BBC reported that GCHQ were able to "legally snoop" on users of social media and email systems.[57] Commentators compared the activities of GCHQ to those of a "surveillance state", resulting in GCHQ being named the biggest "internet villain" by the Internet Service Providers' Association.[58]

Public trust

25. We explored the perception that the Government is not trusted to use the personal data of citizens responsibly. Dr Mathieu d'Aquin, Open University, told us that the key question held by a number of individuals is "What are they going to do with [my data], and how can I understand what is going to be done with it in such a way that I can be reassured that the interpretation, understanding and use of the data will not go against my interest?"[59] The University of Manchester told us that "experimental research in relation to confidentiality statements" has shown that the public supports secondary data use "when they are aware of the purpose of it", but EMC, an IT company, told us there was a failure in communicating the benefits of big data analysis to the general public.[60] techUK speculated that the Government may be hesitant in talking about data use due to a "fear of media and public opinion following several high profile cases of lost data, security breaches and general 'mistrust' of how government uses this type of information".[61]

26. Emma Carr, Big Brother Watch, highlighted that "generally, people hold the Government to a much higher standard when it comes to data protection" than they do private companies.[62] She explained that "people know that private companies are usually using their data to make money" but that "people seem to get extremely upset about data being used within the public sector" or if they "see any indication that the Government are making money" from personal information.[63]

27. A recent example of the Government's poor communication of data use to the public was in relation to care.data.[64] Professor van Zoonen speculated that care.data had been framed as helping the NHS as an institution rather than helping individual patients.[65] This may have led to confusion amongst participants about the personal benefits that they would experience by taking part. There may also have been inadequate communication of the rights of individual patients. Ms Carr told us that Big Brother Watch had carried out some polls and found that a large percentage (69%) of people felt that they "had not been informed of the right to opt out of care.data".[66] The Web Science Trust pointed out that the:

The Horizon Digital Economy Research Institute suggested that the Government should ensure that research involving personal data is overseen by "ethics review panels that operate under published guidelines", as happens in the academic field.[68]

28. Real buy-in from members of the public for the use of their data is most likely to be achieved by delivering well-run services, which meet the expectations of customers. There are some excellent examples of administrative services that already exist in the UK, which demonstrate exactly what the UK should be aiming for: one shining example is paying your road fund license on the DVLA website, an easy-to-use and efficient service.[69] Services such as these provide benefits to both the service provider and customer, providing a trusted platform for the exchange of data and service. care.data is a clear example where this trusted relationship failed to develop.

29. Members of the public do not appear to be wholly against the idea of their data being used by Government institutions, but support for data usage is highly dependent upon the context within which the data is collected. The Government should have learned from the experience with care.data and we recommend that the Government develop a privacy impact assessment that should be applied to all policies that collect, retain or process personal data.

Regulation of the industry

30. Professor Liesbet van Zoonen, Loughborough University, told us that one reason for the lack of trust among the public was the "fear" that the citizen "will lose out to big business interests".[70] Big Brother Watch, referencing a 2013 poll it had commissioned, pointed out that "41% of consumers felt that they were being harmed by companies gathering their personal data" and the Information Commissioner's Office's (ICO) report, Big Data and Data Protection, indicated that "big data is sometimes characterised as a power relationship that favours corporations and governments".[71] The report recognised the EU Commission's draft General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)[72] as an attempt to "shift the balance of power in favour of the individual by giving them more explicit rights over the processing of their personal data", a view supported by the Horizon Digital Economy Research Institute, which considered the GDPR would tighten "the legal language mandating consent" and establish "a stronger bias against the potential harm of profiling than previous data protection policy".[73]

31. techUK did not see the GDPR as an unmitigated good, citing a 2013 Deloitte report, Economic Impact Assessment of the proposed European General Data Protection Regulation, that warned that the proposed Regulation could "reduce GDP by €173 billion […] leading to a loss of 2.8 million jobs" across the EU.[74] This was because they considered the legislation would restrict the "ability of businesses to use direct marketing" and by restricting organisations' ability to effectively assess credit risk, "consumer credit could fall by as much as 19%". The Deloitte report considered that the European Commission impact assessment on the proposed Regulation was "limited in its scope" and did not "adequately consider the economic impacts of the Proposed Regulation as currently proposed".[75]

32. In addition to legal obligations, the ICO has explained its views on how organisations should work with personal data. Its report on Big Data and Data Protection has been described as outlining the ways in which the ICO "expects big data organisations to behave".[76] On launching the report, Steve Wood, ICO's Head of Policy Delivery, said that "the basic data protection principles already established in UK and EU law are flexible enough to cover big data" and indicated that new legislation would not be necessary.[77]

33. The UK Computing Research Committee (UKCRC) wrote that consideration of data protection legislation "must look carefully at the practical needs of data intensive research" whilst attempting to "strike a balance between legitimate regulation" and providing the academic research community with the "means of conducting empirical experiments on realistic data".[78] Professor McAuley, Horizon Digital Economy Research Institute, pointed out that some small businesses were concerned about how to work with the "ethical" issues surrounding social media data, whilst still using the data to inform their business needs.[79] He said this was leading to "tension between innovation and regulation".[80] The Internet Association wrote that it endorses a conversation shift towards a "responsible use framework" for data.[81]

34. The Government considered it "essential" to provide for "strong data subject rights to protect against abuse of personal data" but emphasised the need to "strike a balance", recognising that a number of data controllers "have a legitimate interest to process data".[82] The Government's UK Data Capability Strategy, Seizing the data opportunity, stated that "working with the Information Economy Council, the government will look at options to promote guidance and advice on the rights and responsibilities of data users".[83]

35. We note that a primary concern of the general public is that it is unable to limit the misuse of personal data by large organisations, but we recognise the work of the ICO in addressing some of these issues. We are attracted to the position of the ICO that big data should play by the same rules as every other form of data processing. It is essential that organisations operate in a transparent manner, allowing public confidence to flourish in light of knowledge about the way that their data is used.[84] The UK is already a leading player on the global stage in using social media data and we are keen for this status to be maintained, but only if that can be achieved while ensuring the personal privacy of UK citizens.

36 Q37 [Professor Preston] Back

37 Q37 [Professor Preston] Back

38 Q116 [Sir Nigel Shadbolt] Back

39 SMD 023 [para 3.3] Back

40 SMD 023 [para 3.3] Back

41 Q85 [Sir Nigel Shadbolt] Back

42 SMD 023 [para 3.3]; SMD 010 [para 13] Back

43 e-skills UK works "on behalf of employers to develop the software, internet, computer gaming, IT services and business change expertise necessary to thrive in today's global digital economy". See 'About e-skills UK', e-skills.com. Accessed 24 October 2014. Back

44 Qq28-29 [Sureyya Cansoy] Back

45 Q29 [Surreya Cansoy] Back

46 Q30 [Timo Hannay]. Altmetric is a London-based start-up company which aims to "track and analyse the online activity around scholarly literature". See 'About us', altmetric.com. Accessed 24 October 2014. Back

47 Q30 [Timo Hannay] Back