Online Identity Assurance National Stakeholder Group papers: June 2018

Papers relating to the second meeting of the Online Identity Assurance National Stakeholder Group on 19 June 2018.

Attendees and apologies

Attendees (members of the National Stakeholder Group)

  • Roger Halliday, Scottish Government (Chair)
  • Bob Miller, Argyll and Bute Council
  • Geraldine Eastwood, Northern Ireland Civil Services
  • Niamh Webster, Scottish Government Ingage Team
  • Danielle Logan, Young Scot
  • David Laughlin, National Entitlement Card Programme Office
  • John Welford, No2ID
  • Penni Rocks, Scottish Government Health and Social Care Integration
  • Emma Harvey, Scottish Government Ingage Team
  • Arlene Stuart, Scottish Government Social Security
  • Debbie Walker, Transport Scotland
  • David Lord, No2ID
  • Douglas White, Carnegie UK Trust
  • Iain Forrester, Citizens Advice Scotland
  • Kirsten Urquhart, Young Scot
  • Stuart Law, National Records of Scotland
  • Martyn Wallace, Local Government Digital Office
  • Anna Grant, Carnegie UK Trust
  • Gordon Hanning, Transport Scotland
  • Lee Calder, Registers of Scotland
  • Andy Campbell, Improvement Service

Apologies (members)

  • John Finlay, Transport Scotland
  • Rachel Heydecker, Carnegie UK Trust
  • Alan Ferrier, National Records of Scotland
  • Emma Pollock, Education Scotland
  • Joy Bramfitt-Wanless, Disclosure Scotland
  • Douglas Shirlaw, Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA)
  • Cameron Walker, Improvement Service
  • Paul Dymock, Student Awards Agency for Scotland
  • David McNeill, SCVO
  • Tommy Laughlin, Scotland IS
  • Stephanie Brown, Registers of Scotland

Attendees (public registration)

  • Harriet de Wet, We are Snook
  • Stuart Young, etive
  • Alex Stobart, Mydex
  • Jackie Devine, Kainos
  • Derick James, Symphonics Software
  • Bruce Ryan, public interest
  • Luke Jeavons, Soprasteria

Attendees (Scottish Government ‘Programme Team’ and Digital Directorate delivery partners)

  • Susie Braham, Scottish Government
  • Mike Crockart, Scottish Government
  • Gavin Ross, Scottish Government
  • Jess Roscoe, Scottish Government
  • Stephen Peacock, Scottish Government
  • Ross Clark, Scottish Government
  • Leona Devlin, Scottish Government
  • Gillian Munro, Scottish Government
  • Andy Robertson, Independent Assurance Review Team
  • George Whitley, Independent Assurance Review Team

Items and actions

Item 1 – Welcome and introductions

1. Roger Halliday welcomed all to the second meeting of the National Stakeholder Group and provided a brief overview of the work that was completed during the Discovery Phase of the Scottish Government Online Identity Assurance Programme along with an outline of the work that is underway to move the programme on to Alpha.

Item 2 – Minutes and actions from first meeting on 9 February 2018 (paper OIASG – first meeting minutes)

2. Jess Roscoe provided a description of how the feedback from the workshop held at the first National Stakeholder Group meeting has been used to develop the approach to delivery of the programme (at Annex A of Paper OIASG – First Meeting Minutes).

3. Attendees noted the minutes without comment.

Item 3 – Updated remit and terms of reference (paper OIASG-04)

4. Attendees noted the inclusion of new members to the Group.

Item 4 – Outputs from the Discovery Exercise (Paper OIASG-05)

5. Susie Braham presented some of the outputs of the ‘Online Identity Assurance Discovery Service Design’ report, prepared by We Are Snook.

6. Susie provided detail on the 3 recurring themes contained within the report, these are:

  • Convenient. Interviewees had expressed frustration with having to deal with: complex services; navigating through different governments and agencies; forms that are asking the same things in different ways; providing the same information to multiple departments and agencies.

  • Cautious. Research indicated that people were concerned with: the reliability of organisations to hold personal data securely; access and control of personal data; the need for a range of options to suit people’s motivations and concerns.

  • Barriers to Access. The report indicates that significant consideration should be given to those individuals who lack digital skills, use assisted technologies or do not have online access from home. It is likely that third sector groups who support clients with their online applications will be affected by this work and care should be taken to understand their needs.

7. The report also outlines ‘Seven Easy Steps’ which map a hypothetical user journey to illustrate the basic components of an online identity service.

8. Mike Crockart provided an overview of the key points that emerged from the Technical Options Discovery noting that:

  • There is unlikely to be a “One size fits all” solution which could be implemented, we will need an approach that could allow multiple digital identity solutions to be used.

  • This approach could take a number of forms such as a catalogue or portal but it should allow for integration and a common user experience.

  • There is a need for segregation to prevent data being combined to create an aggregated view of a person without their knowledge.

  • Existing Scottish identity assets on their own are not sufficient on their own but could be part of any future solution or part of a migration path. GOV.UK Verify should also be part of the solution if we can “plug in” to it and provide a common approach for existing Verify users.

  • Any solution should be prepared to build support for hard to reach groups

  • We should explore digital identity solutions built around an optional Personal Data Store to address both identity and personal data requirements and also work with an eye to the future to support migration to a Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) / Blockchain if that technology becomes mature.

  • Additional clarity is needed to determine how much control the user should have over the sources that data is taken from, and also how much control and choice users should have over where their attribute data is stored.

Item 5 – Open Government and Communications Update

9. Ross Clark presented an update on Open Government and informed the Group of upcoming communications and engagement work.

Item 6 – Updated Programme Plan (Paper OIASG-06)

10. Gavin Ross set out the measures being taken ahead of Alpha to ensure the solution to be delivered is financially and technically feasible, will involve public sector partners and produce a prototype solution that can be tested with users.

11. Gavin also provided feedback from the recent Programme Board and Expert Group meetings, which included:

  • the need for diligence in balancing service provider and user needs,
  • the desirability of service specific research,
  • the need to clearly define a set of key goals and measureable improvements.

Item 7 – Views on the programme so far

12. Attendees were divided into tables for the workshop discussions and asked to consider and share their views on the programme so far (as described in the items above). The following questions were used to facilitate the discussion: • What did the Discovery do well? • What did the Discovery do less well? • What should we do more of in Alpha? • What should we do less of in Alpha? • What feedback should we take to the Minister tomorrow?

13. Annex A contains the outputs from the workshop discussion.

Future meetings

14. The next full meeting of the National Stakeholder Group is planned to take place around the end of October. Further details will be issued by the project team nearer the date.


15. No actions were indicated at this meeting.

Any Other Business

16. There were no items of AOB.

Annex A

Outputs from second meeting workshop discussion

1. The National Stakeholder Group were asked to reflect and share their thoughts on the programme to date and to consider and comment on the Alpha (as it was described in the first half of the meeting). The following themes emerged from these discussions:

Phase Discovery Alpha
Question a)what went well during the discovery phase? b)what could have been improved during the discovery phase? c)what should we do more of?
Comments from the Group Communications and engagement with stakeholders have been helpful, in particular our approach to Open Government and the publishing of papers and blogs online. The Group requested that we communicate the content of the technical discovery more clearly. It was suggested that we do more to better understand the needs of service providers – designing a process based on specific services and, where appropriate, using data available to partners.
The Group indicated that they are happy with the broad membership of the Group and the level of consultation we have had with stakeholders. Some queries were raised regarding the ‘ask’ of the Group and how the Programme Board and Expert Group’s remits sit alongside the National Stakeholder Group. We should be mindful of, and incorporate, user experience throughout the design process and be especially careful to engage with all demographics to ensure their needs are reflected.
The Group were largely enthusiastic with regards to the approach to user research and were pleased to have had the opportunity to attend and contribute to the Discovery Phase of the programme at the Show and Tell in March. The Group expressed some concerns about how we are interacting with, and including the needs of, service providers in this programme and in particular how myaccount will play into this work. Privacy must be a key consideration throughout Alpha.
The Group asked for greater clarity on the objective of alpha and how it will affect the success of the programme. We should consider the broad range of interests within the Group and reflect this by ensuring we provide clearer explanation on technical issues.

2. The Scottish Government OIA programme team plan to take on the feedback raised at during the workshop session, with a view to addressing these over the coming months. Progress in this area will be covered at the next National Stakeholder Group meeting.

New action 19/6/18-1 For the OIA programme team to take on board the feedback shared during the workshop discussion (Annex A), to inform the next phase of the work.

Back to top