I have been investigating the way in which Thanet Council makes available the public record of planning applications. Before I go any further let me point out that the council has a public duty to publish and make available all planning applications. The information they publish is therefore public information.

I discovered that the council might be breaking the law. I have discovered that the council has made it very hard for the "free press" (and I include bloggers here) to address planning applications and I have found several specific instances of a clear lack of professional standard. All in all I have been in for a number of surprises while researching this issue.

The first surprise is that they are not available from the Thanet Council website. After a little exploring I as able to find the planning section on the council website. The council website claims they are "proud to work in partnership with..."

(Warning this information could make you quite angry)

A commercial website run by the IDOX Group PLC called ukplanning.com here they most generously allow you to search the planning applications listing for free but seem to be a man in the middle for online planning applications. They also subject all the data they process for the council (and many others) to copyright laws that make it impossible to make use of your findings from the site without contravening they claims of ownership.

This quote is taken under the fair use provisions of the self same copyright law that I feel the IDOX Group PLC are abusing.

Reproduction or data extraction of part or all of the contents in any form is prohibited unless for personal, non commercial use. None of the content of this web site may be copied or otherwise incorporated into or stored in any other web site, electronic retrieval system, publication or other work in any form (whether hard copy, electronic or other).

Let me translate - this says that you may not publish (say on a blog) anything you discover (such as say the planning application number of something interesting) and you may not in anyway earn a penny from the knowledge you gain here (however one might do that).

Furthermore as this is the only digital version of the public record you can not partake in the Government sponsored Show Us a Better Way Web 2.0 Mash Up Challenge 2008. Other districts and other counties might be able to take part but as far as Thanet is concerned the digital edition of all planning application data concerning Thanet belongs to the IDOX Group PLC.

Possibly by telling you that F/TH/08/0795 is the planning ID for an application opened for ADSA Stores Ltd, Westwood Road on 1st July 2008 I could be liable in the eyes of this company (according to the TOS). I would link to the application details but for some reason all such information is considered a search and relies on session data which will have expired by the time I have written this article.

From a usability point of view the site is not bad as such but the utter lack of permanent links (permalinks) and the inability to discuss the applications digitally mean that limits are already in place to keep us bloggers and the planning process well away from each other.

Just last month Idox published it's "Interim Results 2008" showing pre-tax profits of £3.2m across the group. Part of that three and a bit million quid came from our pockets.

What irritates me just as much (as an Internet professional) is that the web site displays W3C VALIDATION BADGES AND AA Bobby Approval badges as if to say it is of some fantastic standard but the simple fact remains that HTML documents should not have multiple HEAD or BODY sections. In other words these badges are false advertising. If you click the HTML valid badge you will almost definitely get a message saying how many errors the page has on it.

The ASDA application had 14 errors detected.

From a large and profitable company that claims information management as a core competency such a simple beginners mistake is unacceptable. It makes me ask what else they have gotten wrong and just why our council has chosen to trust them. This raises more questions than answers.

As for the claim of "Level Double-A Conformance to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0" that to is a pile of crap. The incorrectly placed additional HTML/HEAD/BODY tags around some tables and other issues will make it that much harder for a disabled person to use the site It might even be illegal under a number of laws dealing with discrimination against the disabled.

I assert that (in my opinion) what has happened is that the planning process has been effectively privatised and public data subjected to copyright restrictions that stand in opposition to the spirit of the Freedom of Information Act.

Those of you with enough time to make some Freedom of Information requests might like to ask:

1. You might want to ask what is the value of this arrangement to IDOX Group PLC
2a. You may wish to enquire if this is intended to be an exclusive arrangement.
2b. ...and if so what does IDOX Group PLC offer the council for this exclusivity.
3. You might also like to know who sanctioned this agreement and what authority hey had to do so - I know I want to know why local taxes are being given to this company.
4. You might like to know if any councillor connected tot his has shares in IDOX Group PLC or derivative companies (I'd like to know).
5. You may even wish to enquire what and if they do to confirm that the law is fulfilled with regards the data and the site it is on.

One note - any council operative or other individual that cites the Data Protection Act (as they have done before) in relation to a FOI request of this nature is actually talking out of their rear end as the DPA covers personal information only.

I think it is time our council started answering some hard questions on this (and a few other) issues.

UPDATE It would seem that Peter Lilley MP Conservative MP for Hitchin & Harpenden is a non-executive director of Idox Plc.