In April, we convened the Perseus Legal & Policy Advisory Group for its first meeting, co-chaired by Pinsent Masons and Innovate Finance. This group combines AG3 (Data Licensing and Legal) with AG5 (Policy). The purpose of this meeting was to provide some scene setting for the newly formed AG3, provide an update on cross-AG questions, the risk register and dispute resolution process, and finally form AG3’s working groups.

Meeting Summary

  • It was noted that priorities for the newly formed Advisory Group 3 Legal & Policy include:
    • Examining the legal, policy and regulatory issues related to Perseus and understanding how they intersect with the other Advisory Groups e.g. technical build.
    • Identifying and delivering elements which will be essential for the prototype and pilot.
  • It was noted that an update on AG2’s work was presented:
    • AG2 has been building the prototype, based on Open Banking’s FAPI model, which was delivered two months ago with Sage and Demand Logic.
    • Data standards are being drafted, with definitions for half hourly energy and tariff data.
    • The Assurance working group has decided to proceed with regional carbon intensity factors from ESO.
  • AG2 (Technical) is commencing work in permissions definition and management and has posed questions to AG3 for discussion:
    • Can we trust data providers to manage permission from the SME or do we need a role for “Consent Manager” in the TF?
      • It would be expected that the data provider would have the appropriate mechanisms to extend permissions and take responsibility for this.
      • The nature of the data will inform what permission is required.
      • With the incoming data bill, consent management will be built to a standard that’s compatible with GDPR.
    • Do we need to independently assure/audit permission management?
      • If data providers are owning the permissions, it would be necessary to audit.
    • Do building managers need to have a technical role in the Trust Framework? Or is it enough for the SME to set up the reporting and assert it’s theirs?
      • This question will be taken to AG1 to confirm the data source.
  • It was noted that the draft dispute resolution procedure has been designed to resolve disputes between Perseus members and also complaints between members and IB1.
    • The model has been developed based on asynchronous review and will continue to be refined by the Dispute Resolution working group, for review.
  • It was noted that AG3 members and colleagues are invited to sign up to Working Groups in:
    • WG1 – Dispute resolution
    • WG2 – Data licensing
    • WG3 – Carbon accounting auditing and data requirements
  • It was noted that upcoming priorities are:
    • 1) Organise a vote on the direction for consent management 
    • 2) Encourage the audit working group to provide proposals for a decision on how we handle it for the pilot at the next AG.
    • 3) For the next two AGs, Emily will progress the licensing model so it can be proposed at the July AG.
    • 4) The dispute resolution procedure will continue to be refined by Chris and the working group.

The next meeting will take place on July 11th 2024.