One of the most difficult problems solicitors face when planning for the technology-related changes being driven forward by public authorities, ranging from the Land Registry to HM Courts Service, is the tension between individual departmental initiatives and the drive to impose central standards and infrastructure.

Central control promises predictability and coherence; autonomy allows departments to shape their initiatives to meet particular needs.


The tension has existed for some time. The Government Gateway exists as an authentication and routing engine intended to act as a single point of entry to on-line government services. Departments, certainly local authorities, vary in their enthusiasm for it. They do, however, comply with the requirements of the e-Government Interoperability Framework which, since 2001, has mandated the adoption of Internet and World Wide Web standards for all government systems.


Now comes the Implementation plan for transformational government, launched last month. The centre - in the form of the Cabinet Office and the Treasury - have signalled a common 'shared services' approach to issues ranging from information assurance and identity management to technology standards, common infrastructure and data sharing. The comprehensive spending review will ensure that departments take this seriously.


What shared services will mean for electronic conveyancing, criminal justice IT, modernisation of the civil courts or legal services IT remains to be seen.


A coherent approach to common issues such as authentication could benefit the profession. On the other hand, evidence-based flexibility might allow accommodations based on a deeper understanding of the profession's business requirements, its developing IT capability and its capacity to change across the various firm types and practice areas.


We need evidence to shape the discussion and, alongside research carried out by both the Law Society and government departments, this means detailed engagement and informed dialogue between departments and the profession.


Finding and absorbing the disparate information from Whitehall that is relevant to this engagement is challenging. A coherent central strategy and effective information portals, like the proposed Information Technology and the Courts Committee Web site (see [2006] Gazette, 21 April, 9), can only help the process.


Timothy Hill is the Law Society's e-commerce policy adviser


Link: www.it.lawsociety.org.uk