The keyword filter used by the UK’s Rochdale Council ‘blocked’ two emails sent by local resident Ray Kennedy complaining about the extension his neighbor was intending to build because Mr Kennedy had used the term ‘erection’ to describe the proposed work.
The planning legislation in England and Wales provides strict time limits for people to either support or object to applications for new buildings, or changes to the use of existing premises. All communications are supposed to be considered by members of the planning committee before a decision is made, and kept as a matter of public record.
A third email did get through, but it was received after the time limit, and was too late to be considered by the planning committee of the council.
Although Rochdale Council cannot confirm it, it probably did receive the first two emails, but, as it reportedly gets approximately 2,100 emails a month containing the ‘E’-word, identifying the offensive ones is a major task.
Unfortunately this is not just a case of balancing the administration requirements of protecting staff from inappropriate emails against the advantages of e-enablement of government services – it is at best the ignoring, and at worst the deliberate destruction, of information that should be part of the public record to support and demonstrate the decision-making process undertaken on the public’s behalf by its elected representatives.
Mr Kennedy is thinking of applying to the local government ombudsman, although it is now too late to get the decision reversed. All that could happen is that the council is reprimanded, and of course the major hurt is to Mr Kennedy’s pride.
The council has apologized to Mr Kennedy and is now altering its filters to allow the word ‘erection’ alongside ‘planning application’, but it is arguable that there is a case for all potentially offensive emails to be placed in a quarantine area, and to be physically checked before any deletion takes place.
While such manual filtering may take time, and thus resources, there is a major risk management issue in automated deletion. What if the emails had been to social workers referring a child for protection because of evidence or an allegation of sexual abuse? This is not just an issue for the public sector; how about shareholders objecting to a director’s remuneration or choice of auditor, or the complaint of sex discrimination made by an employee who has resigned?
The policies for any automated deletion must come from board level, and there needs to be a record of rationale behind the process. Organizations need to start from the position that every email either created or received is a record that will be required in the future, with all the appropriate safeguards.
Source: OpinionWire by Butler Group (www.butlergroup.com)
