Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Data

Thursday 24 April 2025 · 3 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 1 Partly answered 2 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Minister Steff Aquarone expressed willingness to meet to discuss improving data usage in the public sector.
  • Maya Ellis raised concerns about focusing on AI solutions before adequately collecting data.
  • Richard Holden inquired about the Government's response to the Sullivan review's recommendations.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Steff Aquarone LD North Norfolk
Science & Technology Local Government
Context

The Government's state of digital government review highlighted fragmentation, silos, and a failure to maximise the opportunity of data.

Question

I am glad the Minister mentioned the Government’s state of digital government review and its fairly excoriating conclusions. It is clear that the public sector is not using data well enough. Would the Minister meet me to discuss further how the Cabinet Office can lead in acting on the lessons of the review and ensuring that the citizen experience is put at the heart of the changes it makes?

Answer from Georgia Gould (The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office)

I would be delighted to meet the hon. Member. I am very passionate about this and saw in local government how difficult it was for frontline staff to get data from different services. Most importantly, citizens are having to tell their story to multiple services, which causes confusion. We are working closely with the new digital centre of government on an action plan to address these issues.

Answered
Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q2 Maya Ellis Lab Ribble Valley
Science & Technology Local Government
Context

Minister mentioned the importance of having a clear data picture for using AI opportunities, but concerns about collecting data before implementing efficient systems.

Question

I applaud the Government for putting data at the heart of their plans, but I worry that we could get too carried away with looking at AI solutions before we get to solutions for actually collecting data in the first place. Could the Minister reassure me on how we are working with local government to make sure we are collecting data from all possible sources in one place to start with, before we get to how we can make that more efficient?

Answer from Georgia Gould (The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office)

To use AI opportunities and personalise services, we need a clear data picture. We have huge amounts of data in Government but it is stuck in legacy systems and not shared properly. This is the absolute bedrock of the opportunity around AI, so we are very committed to working with local government.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Did not provide specific details on how data will be collected or integrated efficiently from all sources.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q3 Richard Holden Con Basildon and Billericay
Context

Professor Sullivan's review made 59 recommendations to ensure accuracy and consistency across Government.

Question

I hope to continue the positive cross-party approach to this question. I particularly like the Minister’s commitment to a clear data picture. The Sullivan review into Government data was published in March, making 59 recommendations for accuracy and consistency. Can she reassure me that the Government will issue a full formal response to the review and its recommendations to provide a clear data picture across Government within a year of the report’s publication?

Answer from Georgia Gould (The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office)

I appreciate this collegiate style of discussion. When we came into power, we set out a review that showed just how hard it is for citizens to negotiate services. We have already set out our own plans but will respond formally to external reviews as they come forward.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Did not commit to issuing a formal response within one year, only indicated general commitment and current actions.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)