The commitment of the Prime Minister and officials from Number 10 is real. Those officials who are involved in transparency work know that our commitment is a day-in, day-out commitment by officials at Number 10, and a week-in, week-out commitment by officials at Number 10. If you want to introduce the kind of change that involves having the senior civil service have details about their salary published openly on the web, then you need a very strong political direction and push, because there are many points of inertia within the system.
I would say that if you look at that commitment from the Prime Minister and you look at how Number 10 has driven the agenda in the U.K. government and you look at what was being done, it all fits together. Officials right the way across departments know how important this is to the centre, to deliver on. In terms of the transparency board, they are very much part and parcel of that simple push, chaired by the Minister for the Cabinet Office, who is a very important minister and very influential. It's joining the dots between transparency, strategy, and delivery, and some of the practical problems we encounter, for example, with publishing salary data: when we do or don't redact the name of an official, when we do or don't redact details of a particular payment. And they're helping to provide that strategic direction in what is a new art. Technically and in policy terms, it's a new art.
The other important observation is the extent to which open data is helping to achieve or relieve the burdens of freedom of information, because if our payments information is just published as a matter of routine, if people's salary information, if they're senior, is published as a matter of routine, and if our contracts are published as a matter of routine, when someone makes a request for that information it's very each to answer. It's on the web already. That's one of the efficiency drivers for open data as part of freedom of information. I think that's an important angle to capture.