At IFGS 2025 in London, Edie Lush moderated a panel titled ‘The next frontier of smart data’, with Liz Brandt, CEO at Ctrl-Shift; Dan Scholey, CCO at Moneyhub; Gavin Starks, CEO and founder at Icebreaker One; Marie Walker, open futurist at Raidiam; and Milly Zimeta, head of digital and data policy at Which?. The question is focus being ‘How can the UK become the world's first smart data economy?’.
Lush opened the conversation with a quick fire round asking panellists for their explanations on what smart data is and examples of best practise. Brandt began by defining smart data as general-purpose enabling data, citing open banking as an example. Brandt offered Singapore as a case study, where smart data is used to map career skills and fund individuals to acquire new qualifications.
Scholey’s description involved a combination of multiple data sets to drive better outcomes, highlighting pensions as an underutilised asset. Starks discussed smart data's role in reducing costs and friction in data portability, speaking on green lending. Walker added that smart data should be actionable for insights and payments, pointing to the digitisation of home buying processes as a relevant case. Zimeta, representing a UK consumer association, emphasised the benefits of smart data for consumers, particularly in reducing loyalty penalties and improving competition and innovation.
Transitioning the conversation to where we're already seeing smart data being used, Lush asked what open banking has taught us, both in a positive and a negative way. Walker praised the UK's approach to open banking, but highlighted the importance of mandating sectors and providing clear incentives for data sharing, stating: “This isn't the basic core data right, but for enhanced services, value add, etc., there has to be a very clear reason for fintechs, banks, and other sectors who are not used to sharing data to participate. Getting the incentives right is absolutely critical.”
Brandt added, “We have to build something that's going to enable individuals, not just payments. That is what I would say we didn't do very well, which is focus on the individuals, and then focus on the value, which comes back to the sustainable market. That's where the next phase is.”
Directing the conversation to the impact of the data bill on smart data initiatives, Lush asked Starks (former co-chair of the Smart Data Council), who explained that the data bill could accelerate smart data initiatives but warns against adding too many unrelated elements.
“The upsides are: it provides the primary legislation that would lead to secondary legislations already in development. The potential downside is the more you load into these policy instruments or any initiative, the more you slow them down. So, we need to do less. Ideally, we do one thing well, to go far together. Keep it simple,” commented Starks.
Regarding consumer concerns with the data bill, Zimeta identified the lack of a central coordinating body, and the need for a consistent definition of vulnerability as key gaps in the legislation, mentioning: “Each government department has its own definition of vulnerability, because vulnerability differs by use case. Vulnerability can also change over time or be contextual. If you don't have a consistent definition of vulnerability, then vulnerable people are going to fall between the gaps.”
Scholey agreed, emphasising the need for more people to advocate for consumers, and the importance of a risk-based approach, stating: “We're talking about regulated entities that are going to have access and be able to use this data, they're not going to maliciously lose their regulatory permissions by purposely doing harm. We've also got to think about risk, it's a risk-based approach, and we've got to put protections in place.”
The conversation turned to reasons for slow progress in implementing smart data, with Brandt suggesting a "five mega race" involving governance, government, businesses, consumers, and tech (including AI) in the room, and emphasising the need for agile proof of concepts based on value. Walker supported the idea of pilots and sandbox environments to test and refine smart data schemes.
Moving onto what regulators could do today that would help catalyse faster action, Starks suggested regulators should support initiatives like open banking and provide clear guidance to accelerate progress. Brandt stressed the importance of creating common components that can be reused across different projects. Scholey discussed the importance of mutual benefit for providers and consumers, and the need for clear and consistent government decisions. Walker ended with the focus on aligning incentives, standards, and localisation to create beneficial solutions.
Concluding the panel, Lush asked a final point around building consumer trust and common standards. Zimeta emphasised the importance of principle-based trust frameworks, governance, protection, and scalability for consumer trust. The conversation closed with Zimeta explaining the need for a common language and seamless experiences across sectors to maintain consumer trust.