National Postcodes to be introduced

Sam Russell

The basic fault of the Eircode system is that the routing code (the first three digits) is covering too large an area (from 2,000 to 80,000 addresses) and is useless on its own. All that needs to be done is to extend this to five numbers (so it is numeric rather that alpha-numeric) and thus reduce the number of addresses to less than 200 per routing code. That would mean that the routing code could be used on its own for most purposes and gets over nearly all objections.

An added advantage could be the introduction of the routing codes alone as a transition to the launch of the full Eircode system. A choice would then exist for people as to whether they use the short or long version of the code.

Furthermore, since the routing code is more precise, the random bit need be only three characters long, and the space in the middle could be dropped, making the 7 character Eircode (plus a space) the same length as the Eircode-nua with 5 numbers and 3 optional characters.

If the numbers folowed the dialling codes, we would all know much of the codes already.

SpaceTime

Making it more like

A12B - CDE might help.

You'd immediately get 26 times more routing codes and much smaller areas.

ukoda

Curly Judge wrote: »

The national press seem to be taking an interest in this at last :



http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/analysis/eircode-could-become-next-irish-water-297037.html



http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/devil-is-in-the-detail-of-new-postcode-system-1.1994401?page=2

Not very good journalism considering that eircode have already indicated that 5000 is way of the mark for the cost of the database and have unofficially said its will be closer to 200.

Sam Russell

SpaceTime wrote: »

Making it more like

A12B - CDE might help.

You'd immediately get 26 times more routing codes and much smaller areas.

I was thinking more like:

21487 for Ballincollig, Cork, and 12953 for Dublin, Stillorgan area. These are close to the phone numbers used for those areas and so would be quite memorable for most people. Remember, An Post do not need post codes, and so it would be more use as a geo-position code.

It is not too late to adopt this strategy. Computers are wonderful at doing this kind of work.

However, the Government have a track record in this sort of thing. HSE, Paypars, Irish Water, eVoting, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

Curly Judge

ukoda wrote: »

Not very good journalism considering that eircode have already indicated that 5000 is way of the mark for the cost of the database and have unofficially said its will be closer to 200.

There are no pricing details at all yet and no statement on it either!!


Pricing was supposed to be fixed back in the summer but still no sign!



What’s the problem; we are now 1 year into the contract, less than 6 months before rollout and no firm pricing ????? This undermines the roll-out plans!

Is there some underlying little snag that we are not yet aware of?

Curly Judge

A new article just arrived in the Examiner;- irrational really – this will need legislation to resolve but will mean database cannot be on satnavs. Could only be available over the air via smartphone – not recommended for commercial uses or emergency use!
Other systems in the market wouldn't have this type of problem.

This would render eircode inflexible and inaccessible!

Explains delay in pricing I would say! This matter was raised in 2006 – and nothing was done in the meantime – PA had every chance to try resolving this or change the design but failed! – So Eircode is not fit for purpose!

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/postcode-privacy-solutions-promised-297052.html

Sam Russell

Curly Judge wrote: »

A new article just arrived in the Examiner;- irrational really – this will need legislation to resolve but will mean database cannot be on satnavs. Could only be available over the air via smartphone – not recommended for commercial uses or emergency use!
Other systems in the market wouldn't have this type of problem.

This would render eircode inflexible and inaccessible!

Explains delay in pricing I would say! This matter was raised in 2006 – and nothing was done in the meantime – PA had every chance to try resolving this or change the design but failed! – So Eircode is not fit for purpose!

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/postcode-privacy-solutions-promised-297052.html

From the article :

Mr Hawkes told the board — which was chaired by John Tierney, now Managing Director of Irish Water — that a postcode that would identify an area normally including 20 — 50 dwellings should not give rise to privacy or data protection issues.

Oh dear - closer to another Irish water. Was that the same John Tierney that was responsible for the huge waste of money involved in the Dublin incinerator? Or was he the John Tierney resposible for that hidious library in Dun Laoghairie? Surely nor! You must be joking!

Curly Judge

Sam Russell wrote: »

From the article :
Oh dear - closer to another Irish water. Was that the same John Tierney that was responsible for the huge waste of money involved in the Dublin incinerator? Or was he the John Tierney resposible for that hidious library in Dun Laoghairie? Surely nor! You must be joking!

Atilla the Hun left less destruction behind him than that fellow!

yuloni

This post has been deleted.

Sam Russell

I do not think John Tierney was involved in the eVoting debacle.

a65b2cd

Some extracts from the Oireachtas debate last week, humorous as well as embarrassing for the parties involved.

Eircode is an excellent address database for direct mail, for utilities, for the Revenue and for local property tax but it is a bad postcode.
-> so only good for delivering mail, ESB, Bord Gais, Irish Water, government departments and agencies – why would you use a postcode to deliver letters!!!

Deputy Michael Colreavy: I cannot get an answer to that simple question: what problem is this postcode system attempting to solve?
-> hmm …. non-unique addresses

Mr. Tom Carr: I am from Palletxpress. Some of us have never met before although we are from a similar industry - but the bottom line for us is that we have all, without even giving it consideration, concluded that there is no use in this for us whatsoever.
-> so they didn’t even give it consideration

Deputy Michael Colreavy: Does Mr. Carr's company use location software?
Mr. Tom Carr:. I can only speak for my part of the industry, but many of us use barcoding and scanning. !!!!!

Mr. Neil McDonnell: a man in a hi-vis vest, a man in a van or a woman behind a computer screen
-> hmm … be careful with your words sir

Deputy Seán Kenny: I have listened with interest to the views of the witnesses and I am trying to understand the difficulties they say will present. Mr. Smith has said deliveries are done in a certain order according to existing postcodes.
-> are there already existing national postcodes?

Mr. Tom Carr: If 100 people place an order for a laptop and they come into our system, we do not know whether we can sequence delivery.
Deputy Seán Kenny: Will the existing addresses that include street name and house numbers still be available? Will deliveries be organised according to such information?
Mr. Tom Carr: Yes, and we will continue to do so.
-> some insight at last

Deputy Noel Harrington: I thank the witnesses for their presentation. Would it be fair to say that Eircode is based on a geodirectory system, a unique identifier for every address in the country?
Mr. Neil McDonnell: Not at all. A unique identifier presents data protection issues that do not arise with a less granular structure. We do not believe there are fundamental data protection issues with a unique identifier. Although geodirectory gives a longitude and latitude, that is insufficient data to route because if we go back to simple maths, a longitude and latitude gives a point and what these people want to buy are lines.
-> no fundamental issues with a unique identifier like street name and house number

Mr. Tom Carr: It is a good system for the emergency services because they can pinpoint a location, but they are not pinpointing a location on a sequential basis as it is once-off locations that they are pinpointing.

Mr. Neil McDonnell: The question about the delivery of post is interesting. It is not a question for us but I would seriously question whether An Post will even use Eircode to deliver. It would be very interesting to ask An Post whether it is going to use the random string to deliver mail or just sort it into the postal districts and continue to do what it is doing right now. I suspect it is the latter.
-> hopefully they will meet An Post

Mr. Neil McDonnell: On the question of cost, businesses like this are presented with a Hobson's choice of spending money to buy a database and then paying someone to interpret that database or simply to continue to do what they are doing right now. I suspect that most of them, for practical cost reasons - not merely as a money issue - will continue to do what they are doing right now because that still will get them to the end address, albeit on a less efficient basis than is possible, without paying someone extra money for so doing.
-> so current system is less efficient but despite their economic importance they will not invest and upgrade

Mr. Neil McDonnell: We are suggesting a geo or location-based or sequenced postcode that gives adjacency to addresses, that is, a postcode which states that address one is beside address two.

Mr. Neil McDonnell: It is a postal address database, not a postcode.

Chairman: We will leave it there for the present. On behalf of the joint committee, I thank Mr. Neil McDonnell, Mr. Tom Carr, Mr. Andy Smith and Mr. Niall Cotton for their attendance today and for engaging with us so openly. I am looking forward to meeting the departmental officials who, together with representatives of Capita, will appear before us in two weeks' time.

The joint committee adjourned at 11.05 a.m. until noon on Tuesday, 11 November 2014.

SpaceTime

I'd say the Data Protection issues will probably scupper the system entirely to be honest.

I can't really see how they're going to resolve them as a unique ID code for each property is by its definition - personal data.

So, putting it into a public database is going to cause massive issues.

They were asked to create a post code and instead they created a PPS number for letter boxes.

yuloni

This post has been deleted.

tvc15

SpaceTime wrote: »

I'd say the Data Protection issues will probably scupper the system entirely to be honest.

I can't really see how they're going to resolve them as a unique ID code for each property is by its definition - personal data.

So, putting it into a public database is going to cause massive issues.

They were asked to create a post code and instead they created a PPS number for letter boxes.

Unfortunately this is the only way I am going to get people to find my house, the only company that can find my house from my address is an post. Every other delivery I get takes a long series of directions which has a relatively low success rate even then.

I don't feel like waiting years for another system and if the data protection commissioner gets his way no postcode will be developed that will identify my address as it would by definition be specific to my house, loc8 is included in that

Enduro

tvc15 wrote: »

Unfortunately this is the only way I am going to get people to find my house, the only company that can find my house from my address is an post. Every other delivery I get takes a long series of directions which has a relatively low success rate even then.

I don't feel like waiting years for another system and if the data protection commissioner gets his way no postcode will be developed that will identify my address as it would by definition be specific to my house, loc8 is included in that

Firstly, the DPC is a she, not a he.

Secondly, the thing about the likes of Loc8 (and similarly designed codes), is that they can have different degrees of accuracy. So you could choose to use a highly accurate code, whereas most people would only need accuracy to neighbourhood level (and could choose to use a shorter version of the code). Whereas with the current Eircode design nobody gets a choice... it's either accurate to a single delivery address or completely useless.

ukoda

Enduro wrote: »

Firstly, the DPC is a she, not a he.

Secondly, the thing about the likes of Loc8 (and similarly designed codes), is that they can have different degrees of accuracy. So you could choose to use a highly accurate code, whereas most people would only need accuracy to neighbourhood level (and could choose to use a shorter version of the code). Whereas with the current Eircode design nobody gets a choice... it's either accurate to a single delivery address or completely useless.

The fact that loc8 can be used as a unique identifier means it would face the exact same data protection problems or change the code to not allow that level of detail

The DPC wouldn't be happy with loc8 in its current format either

They would either request it to be restricted to a broader area identified or it would be in the same boat that eircode is in now and be awaiting the same review

tvc15

Enduro wrote: »

Firstly, the DPC is a she, not a he.

Secondly, the thing about the likes of Loc8 (and similarly designed codes), is that they can have different degrees of accuracy. So you could choose to use a highly accurate code, whereas most people would only need accuracy to neighbourhood level (and could choose to use a shorter version of the code). Whereas with the current Eircode design nobody gets a choice... it's either accurate to a single delivery address or completely useless.

Well technically eircode has a less accurate component as well even if it is useless in any practical sense. It doesn't change the fact that if this data protection concern gets a footing, I can say goodbye to a useful national postcode for my admittedly selfish reasons (although I doubt I am alone in this)

Enduro

ukoda wrote: »

The fact that loc8 can be used as a unique identifier means it would face the exact same data protection problems or change the code to not allow that level of detail

The DPC wouldn't be happy with loc8 in its current format either

They would either request it to be restricted to a broader area identified or it would be in the same boat that eircode is in now and be awaiting the same review

That's not true. With Eircode there is no choice about accuracy. It's all or nothing. With Loc8 one can choose to provide a less accurate, but still useful and usable code by shortening the code. Therefore Loc8 does not need to be a unique identifier at all. So there would be no data protection issues.

Another factor of course is that Eircode Requires a database, and the database will be sold. That looks like another DP issue. It would not be legal to have a database of PPSNs available to purchase. As stated above, Eircodes are the equivalent of PPSNs for locations. Their non-tunable precision makes them personal data.,Algorithmic codes such as Loc8 don't have this issue, as there is no datase being distributed.

ukoda

Enduro wrote: »

That's not true. With Eircode there is no choice about accuracy. It's all or nothing. With Loc8 one can choose to provide a less accurate, but still useful and usable code by shortening the code. Therefore Loc8 does not need to be a unique identifier at all. So there would be no data protection issues.

Another factor of course is that Eircode Requires a database, and the database will be sold. That looks like another DP issue. It would not be legal to have a database of PPSNs available to purchase. As stated above, Eircodes are the equivalent of PPSNs for locations. Their non-tunable precision makes them personal data.,Algorithmic codes such as Loc8 don't have this issue, as there is no datase being distributed.

doesnt matter, about the choice part, if the code can identify a property the DPC will take issue with it, even if theres a choice not to use it. Theres a choice now not to use eircode at all and they still have an issue with it.

The database doesnt matter, we already have an address database you can buy, its called the geo directory and DPC have no issue with it

Enduro

tvc15 wrote: »

Well technically eircode has a less accurate component as well even if it is useless in any practical sense. It doesn't change the fact that if this data protection concern gets a footing, I can say goodbye to a useful national postcode for my admittedly selfish reasons (although I doubt I am alone in this)

The first 3 characters of the Eircode are useless. The only reason they exists is the political cowardice of a minister who decided to hobble the whole postcode process by deciding that the dublin postcodes had to be retained.

The data protection issue was raised years ago as an issue, an the implementation of Eircode chosen has the very issues that the DPC warned would be problematic. So there's no doubt about it getting a footing. The Eircode implementors jumped in with both feet into the DP issue. Maybe they hoped it would just magically go away or be ignored.

Carawaystick

I wonder if the govt thought a 40million plus turnover company would have the cop on not to get dragged down by basic Data Protection law...

And I wonder if the govt will have the cop on to sue for failure to implement the system....

ukoda

Carawaystick wrote: »

And I wonder if the govt will have the cop on to sue for failure to implement the system....

If its not implemented....i highly doubt the government is going to sue capita for not implementing the system when its the government stopping them implementing it.....

DPC is a government dept afterall

Enduro

ukoda wrote: »

If its not implemented....i highly doubt the government is going to sue capita for not implementing the system when its the government stopping them implementing it.....

DPC is a government dept afterall

Incorrect. DPC is not a government department. It is independant of the government, and AFAIK has to be independant of the goverment under EU DP laws. That enables it to hold govenment departments to account without fear of political interferance.

The DP issues with Eircode are a perfect example of why it is important to have an independant DPC.

ukoda

Enduro wrote: »

Incorrect. DPC is not a government department. It is independant of the government, and AFAIK has to be independant of the goverment under EU DP laws. That enables it to hold govenment departments to account without fear of political interferance.

The DP issues with Eircode are a perfect example of why it is important to have an independant DPC.

Sorry now, but its an agency commissioned by the government, upholds the laws of the government and its departments, is funded by the government and the commissioner is appointed by the government

ardmacha

ukoda wrote: »

Sorry now, but its an agency commissioned by the government, upholds the laws of the government and its departments, is funded by the government and the commissioner is appointed by the government

How should such a commissioner be appointed?

ukoda

ardmacha wrote: »

How should such a commissioner be appointed?

Where did i say I think they shouldn't be appointed by the government???

The point im making is that the government isn't ever going to sue capita because the person they appointed as DPC delayed and / or stopped the role out of eircode.

That's all I'm saying.

recedite

Curly Judge wrote: »

A new article just arrived in the Examiner;- irrational really – this will need legislation to resolve but will mean database cannot be on satnavs. Could only be available over the air via smartphone – not recommended for commercial uses or emergency use!
Other systems in the market wouldn't have this type of problem.

This would render eircode inflexible and inaccessible!

Explains delay in pricing I would say! This matter was raised in 2006 – and nothing was done in the meantime – PA had every chance to try resolving this or change the design but failed! – So Eircode is not fit for purpose!

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/postcode-privacy-solutions-promised-297052.html

If the code itself is personal data, I don't see how they would be allowed to sell the database, for any price, without getting individual permissions from everybody on it. I think Capita were hoping that the eircode itself would not be considered personal data, that the code would only become personal data when linked to the name of the person living at the address. And that people would release that info (their name linked to the eircode) themselves. But from the article;

A spokesperson for the Data Protection Commissioner said it has engaged with the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources in light of the fact that Eircode will constitute personal data for the purposes of the Data Protection Acts and will therefore be subject to the protections and restrictions in those Acts.
“It is the understanding of this office that the code will not be introduced until satisfactory solutions to address the data protection elements of the project have been put in place,” a spokesperson for the Data Protection Commissioner.

Sam Russell wrote: »

From the article :
Oh dear - closer to another Irish water. Was that the same John Tierney that was responsible for the huge waste of money involved in the Dublin incinerator? Or was he the John Tierney resposible for that hidious library in Dun Laoghairie? Surely nor! You must be joking!

Surely there must be a plum job far away in Brussels awaiting him after this :pac:

antoinolachtnai

ukoda wrote: »

Sorry now, but its an agency commissioned by the government, upholds the laws of the government and its departments, is funded by the government and the commissioner is appointed by the government

Under EU law, the data protection commissioner must act with complete independence. (See Case C-288/12 Commission v Hungary).

http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-04/cp140053en.pdf

a65b2cd

Oh dear! Looks like Alex White has thought of everything ... reply to a parliamentary question on 23/10:

... The necessary protections will operate around the use of Eircodes to ensure that data protection legislation is complied with. Holders of personal data are bound by Data Protection legislation in how they store and use this data, and the introduction of Eircodes will not alter this obligation.

That Irish Examiner article reads like it was written months ago, more lazy journalism. He could at least have made it clear what date those quotes were from and whether it was before the new DPC was appointed.

The PPSN is personal, owned by you, and travels with you when you move address. It identifies one person. The eircode identifies an address. Someone may live there, many people may live there, some people may live there some of the time, may be even just a PO Box with no one ever at home!

Great opportunity next week for Capita to shine and get everyone onside, this Oireachtas committee may be yet be an own goal for the freight transport association.

Bray Head

Enduro wrote: »

Secondly, the thing about the likes of Loc8 (and similarly designed codes), is that they can have different degrees of accuracy. So you could choose to use a highly accurate code, whereas most people would only need accuracy to neighbourhood level (and could choose to use a shorter version of the code). Whereas with the current Eircode design nobody gets a choice... it's either accurate to a single delivery address or completely useless.

A multi-layered code is the kind of thing that interests people who have a good understanding of these issues. This is close to 100% of us on this thread but closer to 0% of the general population. I have severe doubts that an appreciable number of users would even realise that a code could be split into various parts, never mind use it. This is not a defence of eircode per se, I just feel it would be redundant.

Many on here have advocated greater granularity within the code. I am not convinced. Codes that are specific to a hundred or even a thousand dwellings would very quickly excite the passions of snobbery that lie within most of us. Certain codes would develop good and bad reputations. And for the latter, crucially, people might be less inclined to use them.

Just imagine your mobile number gave a clue to how much your handset was worth. Would you be more or less inclined to share your number?