[Andy Mayhew]

And presumably even if Jones didn't use it, the data exists? In which case it'd be sensible to ask for it since obviuously they'll be happy to provide it to anyone who asks because all such data should be publically available :)

[JohnG]

Quote

Andy Mayhew - 17/8/2009 21:03

And presumably even if Jones didn't use it, the data exists? In which case it'd be sensible to ask for it since obviously they'll be happy to provide it to anyone who asks because all such data should be publically available :)

I like it [hehe]

[ldavidcooke]

Hey Andy,

Exactly, no man or country has the right to hold Science hostage.... 666

Of course if there is an expense in the collection and maintenance of the data compensation by users of the data may be appropriate. However, once the data has been purchased by an organization the initial data can still be accessed by that organization though it cannot be posted in public. The results of the application of the experiment can be published and the data set result should be placed in the public domain, if the resulting information was generated from original information purchased with or the experiment was funded by public funds.

This would suggest that the raw data should be available as a means of compensation for the work and maintenance of the derived information from that work to the point that public funds are involved. Put another way if Zambia were to expend 200 thousand dollars annually to setup, collect and maintain a raw data set that complied to global specifications. Then if a country or organization wanted licensed access to the raw data set then a portion of that 200 thousand dollar cost should be reimbursable to the Zambian government.

However, once that data was incorporated into a global model, that the results from that model, if either the access to the Zambian data or the model itself were paid for with public funds, then the results of the model should be in a publicly accessible domain for that country or licensable by the purchasing organization to other countries or organizations. Based on my understanding this is the premise of the current system; however, I have not seen documentation of the process similar to this in over 25 years. Once paid for, the data used to create the model should be placed in a controlled access Archive system and that is not what is happening.

Cheers!
Dave Cooke

[Andy Mayhew]

I agree Dave.

But if agreements have been made in the past - however much we ourselves may today disagree with them - we cannot change them. We can only urge for such mistakes not to be made again. And there is absolutely no evidence anyone made such agreements 15 or more years ago for disingenuous purposes. After all, we didn't know what the data would show until the data has been obtained and analysed. I would however question the motives of those today implying such things.

[ldavidcooke]

Hey Andy,

Concur about former agreements, providing they still exist and are in-force, generally there are time limitations and/or licensing documentation that would be associated with the data and is required by force of law to be maintained together. That this association was not maintained suggests either the former agreement is no longer in force or licensing has been terminated and renewal should have been required.

That the entire issue should be the fodder of a climate forum calls into question that maybe we have not held the focus on the correct subject and allowed it to drift away from the intent of the forum.... [hi] Maybe we need to turn it towards the true issue, as regards the collection and maintenance of data....

Cheers!
Dave Cooke

[PK2]

Quote

Andy Mayhew - 17/8/2009 22:14

I agree Dave.

But if agreements have been made in the past - however much we ourselves may today disagree with them - we cannot change them. We can only urge for such mistakes not to be made again. And there is absolutely no evidence anyone made such agreements 15 or more years ago for disingenuous purposes. After all, we didn't know what the data would show until the data has been obtained and analysed. I would however question the motives of those today implying such things.

I've no idea about these agreements but at least a couple of the non-disclosure agreements I've had to sign also instructed me that I'm not supposed to acknowledge the existence of the agreement :s . No idea why, how enforceable they are, or whether it's the case in this instance. I've got a vague feeling it might be the case with the official secrets act but I'm not sure.
Only hope I haven't broke that agreement by posting this here o| .

[John Mason]

I had to sign binding non-disclosure agreements when working for the British Geological Survey years ago: mostly in my case because the data we were collecting was commercially very sensitive, but it is standard procedure when you are working for such an organisation.

Cheers - John 

[MPv]

Quote

John Mason - 18/8/2009 08:10

I had to sign binding non-disclosure agreements when working for the British Geological Survey years ago: mostly in my case because the data we were collecting was commercially very sensitive, but it is standard procedure when you are working for such an organisation.

Cheers - John 

I assume you could find the agreements within minutes if asked to produce it.

The Met Office has been unable to find its confidentiality agreements. Competent?

[MPv]

Quote

Andy Mayhew - 17/8/2009 21:01

How do you know? Are you saying the Hadley global temp reconstructions included no data from China? Can you support that assertion?

But in any case, same question to Russia ..... ;)

How do I know they don't exist? I have worked out as much from the behaviour of the met authorities.

Of course this question from you is like the illogical one of proving god doesn't exist or pink unicorns on the far side of the moon do not exist.

Far easier for those who think the data does exist to provide hard evidence. You have failed to do so, thus once again distorting the debate and turning the burden of proof on the wrong person.

[John Mason]

Quote

MPv - 18/8/2009 08:12

Quote

John Mason - 18/8/2009 08:10

I had to sign binding non-disclosure agreements when working for the British Geological Survey years ago: mostly in my case because the data we were collecting was commercially very sensitive, but it is standard procedure when you are working for such an organisation.

Cheers - John

I assume you could find the agreements within minutes if asked to produce it. The Met Office has been unable to find its confidentiality agreements. Competent?

Of course not - they are probably gathering dust in some forgotten filing-cabinet along with the stream sediment samples I collected. The reports are available via the BGS shop, but they are, of course, presentations of the raw data, not the raw data itself [hehe]

Cheers - John 

[Andy Mayhew]

Sorry John, but unless you can show me the raw data I refuse to believe that it ever existed [hehe]

[John Mason]

Quote

Andy Mayhew - 18/8/2009 08:44 Sorry John, but unless you can show me the raw data I refuse to believe that it ever existed [hehe]

[hehe]

cheers - John 

[John Mason]

Quote

Village - 18/8/2009 09:36

Quote

Andy Mayhew - 17/8/2009 21:03 And presumably even if Jones didn't use it, the data exists? In which case it'd be sensible to ask for it since obviuously they'll be happy to provide it to anyone who asks because all such data should be publically available :)

Andy,

You are being a tad naive on this point I believe.

Do you not realise that all of that data is a state secret and not allowed to be released without prior written authority?

It all comes under the ministry of defense and it has to be de-classified first which gives every opportunity for the government to cherry pick what you find out. You should know this.

A bit like UFOs but more serious ;)

Cheers - John 

[PK2]

Quote

Village - 18/8/2009 09:36

Quote

Andy Mayhew - 17/8/2009 21:03 And presumably even if Jones didn't use it, the data exists? In which case it'd be sensible to ask for it since obviuously they'll be happy to provide it to anyone who asks because all such data should be publically available :)

Andy,

You are being a tad naive on this point I believe.

Do you not realise that all of that data is a state secret and not allowed to be released without prior written authority?

It all comes under the ministry of defense and it has to be de-classified first which gives every opportunity for the government to cherry pick what you find out. You should know this.

I don't think we can declare China's (for example but any country would do) data our state secret. That's their state secret or not as the case may be. If they give us what they consider to be a state secret then I would imagine we'd have to treat it as our state secret though.

[Dave K]

Quote

PK2 - 18/8/2009 09:42

Quote

Village - 18/8/2009 09:36

Quote

Andy Mayhew - 17/8/2009 21:03 And presumably even if Jones didn't use it, the data exists? In which case it'd be sensible to ask for it since obviuously they'll be happy to provide it to anyone who asks because all such data should be publically available :)

Andy,

You are being a tad naive on this point I believe.

Do you not realise that all of that data is a state secret and not allowed to be released without prior written authority?

It all comes under the ministry of defense and it has to be de-classified first which gives every opportunity for the government to cherry pick what you find out. You should know this.

I don't think we can declare China's (for example but any country would do) data our state secret. That's their state secret or not as the case may be. If they give us what they consider to be a state secret then I would imagine we'd have to treat it as our state secret though.

Yes, under the Official Secrets Act 1989 (relevant part) which I have signed BTW ;) 

Disclosure has to be made with lawful official authorisation;

 “official authorisation” includes an authorisation duly given by or on behalf of the State or organisation concerned or, in the case of an organisation, a member of it;

State” includes the government of a State and any organ of its government and references to a State other than the United Kingdom include references to any territory outside the United Kingdom.

Obviously if the CIA gives the UK  information in confidence we wouldn't expect an official to blab it to any Tom, Dick or Harry that asks for it.   Though weather data is somewhat less critical than intelligence - and what this data doing on a public FTP server... 

[PK2]

Quote

Big Dave's Gusset - 18/8/2009 09:59

Quote

PK2 - 18/8/2009 09:42

Quote

Village - 18/8/2009 09:36

Quote

Andy Mayhew - 17/8/2009 21:03 And presumably even if Jones didn't use it, the data exists? In which case it'd be sensible to ask for it since obviuously they'll be happy to provide it to anyone who asks because all such data should be publically available :)

Andy,

You are being a tad naive on this point I believe.

Do you not realise that all of that data is a state secret and not allowed to be released without prior written authority?

It all comes under the ministry of defense and it has to be de-classified first which gives every opportunity for the government to cherry pick what you find out. You should know this.

I don't think we can declare China's (for example but any country would do) data our state secret. That's their state secret or not as the case may be. If they give us what they consider to be a state secret then I would imagine we'd have to treat it as our state secret though.

Yes, under the Official Secrets Act 1989 (relevant part) which I have signed BTW ;) 

Disclosure has to be made with lawful official authorisation;

 “official authorisation” includes an authorisation duly given by or on behalf of the State or organisation concerned or, in the case of an organisation, a member of it;

State” includes the government of a State and any organ of its government and references to a State other than the United Kingdom include references to any territory outside the United Kingdom.

Obviously if the CIA gives the UK  information in confidence we wouldn't expect an official to blab it to any Tom, Dick or Harry that asks for it.   Though weather data is somewhat less critical than intelligence - and what this data doing on a public FTP server... 

Are you allowed to disclose that you've signed it?

[Dave K]

[QUOTE]PK2 - 18/8/2009 10:07  [/QUOTE]Are you allowed to disclose that you've signed it?[/QUOTE]

Yes, though it would be inapt to disclose exactly why one had to sign it! Besides, if someone asks why you can't give out information then quoting the OSA is a convenient excuse 8-)

Point is that FOI only takes you so far and it would be naïve to think otherwise.

[PK2]

Quote

Big Dave's Gusset - 18/8/2009 10:14

Quote

PK2 - 18/8/2009 10:07  Are you allowed to disclose that you've signed it?

Yes, though it would be inapt to disclose exactly why one had to sign it! Besides, if someone asks why you can't give out information then quoting the OSA is a convenient excuse 8-)
Point is that FOI only takes you so far and it would be naïve to think otherwise.

OK, I was just thinking of some NDA's have had to sign, of the first parts of which was that I shouldn't disclose that the NDA exists.