Skip to main content
Pots and Black Kettles

You may recall how Computer Weekly reported how, Government had warned the IT industry that "lies" and "exorbitant and unsubstantiated claims" by suppliers are jeopardising the future of public-private partnerships,

It was Peter Gershon, Chief Executive of the Office of Government Commerce, who told vendors to "get their act together" and recognise the need to deliver success and value for money, adding "There is little evidence that the IT industry has an understanding of what is needed to make these partnerships work,"

“Every day”, complained Mr Gershon, "I'm faced by suppliers who make exorbitant and unsubstantiated claims” and he was joined by the e-Envoy Andrew Pinder, who argued , "some projects have failed because suppliers have lied about their capability and promised things they cannot deliver”.

Andrew Pinder

Government appears then, to be suggesting that the IT industry is selling ‘snake oil’ and that when large public sector projects fail or run wildly over budget, which of course 50% of them do, any blame should lie squarely at the feet of IT and not with a long tradition of failure among senior management in many central government departments.

When one mixes the unprincipled and the allegedly incompetent, then the results are not totally unexpected. However, it is not just suppliers who have “promised things they cannot deliver”.

I have pulled out four Government headlines from the last month and I will let you judge whether these are in any way fanciful or exaggerated?

- This Government will meet its target to have all public services online by 2005
- The NHS is a perfect example of how the government is modernising public services and using new technology to find challenging new solutions to meet the needs of the British public
- The Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND) is looking to reduce the intake of asylum seekers via facial recognition systems.
- Whitehall will soon be able to secure online communications and transactions between government agencies

All four involve IT but does anyone really believe that these statements are true? Perhaps the last one, involving secure communications, might be, if only because ‘soon’ can mean anything.

The reality is that Government is depending on IT to deliver the reforms that the public sector so badly needs but the problem, is that Government is as guilty of exaggeration as any of its technology partners. Government has mandated that a number of steps will have been completed by 2005 but it can’t be sure that the technology it is buying into will guarantee the success it requires for political purposes. As a result, everyone starts making ‘promises’ and these targets become ‘aspirational’, while you and I sit there wondering how anyone in Government can keep a straight face when accusing others of making “exorbitant and unsubstantiated claims”.

Surely, it’s what Government in this country does best?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Civilisational Data Mining

It’s a new expression I haven’t heard before. ‘Civilisational data mining.’

Let me start by putting it in some context. Every character, you or I have typed into the Google search engine or Facebook over the last decade, means something, to someone or perhaps ‘something,’ if it’s an algorithm.


In May 2014, journalists revealed that the United States National Security Agency, the NSA, was recording and archiving every single cell-phone conversation that took place in the Bahamas. In the process they managed to transform a significant proportion of a society’s day to day interactions into unstructured data; valuable information which can of course be analysed, correlated and transformed for whatever purpose the intelligence agency deems fit.

And today, I read that a GOP-hired data company in the United States has ‘leaked’ personal information, preferences and voting intentions on… wait for it… 198 million US citizens.

Within another decade or so, the cost of sequencing the human genome …

The Nature of Nurture?

Recently, I found myself in a fascinating four-way Twitter exchange, with Professor Adam Rutherford and two other science-minded friends The subject, frequently regarded as a delicate one, genetics and whether there could exist an unknown but contributory genetic factor(s) or influences in determining what we broadly understand or misunderstand as human intelligence.

I won’t discuss this subject in any great detail here, being completely unqualified to do so, but I’ll point you at the document we were discussing, and Rutherford’s excellent new book, ‘A Brief History of Everyone.”

What had sparked my own interest was the story of my own grandfather, Edmond Greville; unless you are an expert on the history of French cinema, you are unlikely to have ever hear of him but he still enjoys an almost cult-like following for his work, half a century after his death.

I've been enjoying the series "Genius" on National Geographic about the life of Albert Einstein. The four of us ha…
The Mandate of Heaven

eGov Monitor Version

“Parliament”, said my distinguished friend “has always leaked like a sieve”.

I’m researching the thorny issue of ‘Confidence in Public Sector Computing’ and we were discussing the dangers presented by the Internet. In his opinion, information security is an oxymoron, which has no place being discussed in a Parliament built upon the uninterrupted flow of information of every kind, from the politically sensitive to the most salacious and mundane.

With the threat of war hanging over us, I asked if MPs should be more aware of the risks that surround this new communications medium? More importantly, shouldn’t the same policies and precautions that any business might use to protect itself and its staff, be available to MPs?

What concerns me is that my well-respected friend mostly considers security in terms of guns, gates and guards. He now uses the Internet almost as much as he uses the telephone and the Fax machine and yet the growing collective t…