Government Paying 'Obscene Amount Of Public Money' On IT Projects, MPs Warn

Keyboard Computer

First Posted: 28/07/11 10:13 BST Updated: 26/09/11 11:12 BST   PA

PRESS ASSOCIATION -- The Government is reportedly paying up to 10 times more for IT projects than the standard commercial rate, a group of MPs has warned

The Public Administration Select Committee found ministers were "overly reliant" on a few large suppliers, resulting in the waste of an "obscene amount of public money".

Committee chairman Bernard Jenkin said that according to some sources, the Government paid contractors between seven and 10 times more than the standard rate.

But ministers did not collect the information required to verify these claims, he added.

In a report, the cross-party committee found the Government's overall record in developing and implementing new IT systems was "appalling".

The report stated: "The lack of IT skills in Government and over-reliance on contracting out is a fundamental problem which has been described as a 'recipe for rip-offs'.

"IT procurement has too often resulted in late, over-budget IT systems that are not fit for purpose.

"Given the cuts that they are having to make in response to the fiscal deficit it is ridiculous that some departments spend an average of £3,500 on a desktop PC."

The committee criticised the dominance of Government IT by a small number of large companies.

Conservative MP Mr Jenkin said: "The Government has said that it is overly-reliant on an 'oligopoly' of suppliers; some witnesses went further and described the situation as a 'cartel'. Whatever we call the situation it has led to an inexcusable situation that sees governments waste an obscene amount of public money."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK

PRESS ASSOCIATION -- The Government is reportedly paying up to 10 times more for IT projects than the standard commercial rate, a group of MPs has warned The Public Administration Select Committee ...
PRESS ASSOCIATION -- The Government is reportedly paying up to 10 times more for IT projects than the standard commercial rate, a group of MPs has warned The Public Administration Select Committee ...
Filed by Jacqueline Head  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 8
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
12:33 PM on 07/29/2011
I think the biggest cause of the problem is the interference of senior politicians. Whenever we get a sensational media story (e.g. death of child by abusive carers) we get the "this must never happen again" soundbites, followed by "systems" like Contactpoint which has cost a fortune, and now been abandoned.

They don't hire independent, intelligent experts to do proper feasibility, they get a bit of advice from a big "friendly" supplier, who recommends a big complex solution, and then it's all about "when will it be ready?"

Costs, risks and benefits are just ignored.
11:21 PM on 07/28/2011
Until someone comes up with some facts, figures and evidence this is just rhetoric.
04:19 PM on 07/28/2011
I watched a new wing being built in my local hospital, and was kept updated as to the costs. They were incredible. The overall cost was 10 times what it would cost to put up a house on a pre sq m basis. Most of this is corridor and open floor space, the expensive commissioning and equipment came later.

I genuinely thought the Brown agenda was to support large building contractors with free money.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
slocomgp
Reality has a liberal bias........
03:39 PM on 07/28/2011
Time to cut Medicare, SS, Medicaid & Unemployment (so called entitlements). That way the incredible waste can continue and the rich can get richer.
02:49 PM on 07/28/2011
Government is attracted to large firms supplying IT as in most cases its for a lot of users in an important area. Each government department is akin to a large corporation in size and I don't guess large corps go to small IT suppliers when it comes to supplying its IT infrastructure either.
However what makes the difference is that governments supply services so its most important that they have confidence in having a system work rather than work economically to increase profit. That said they really do need to up their game in making sure that all possible eventualities of failure are covered in contract negotiations and have severe penalty provisions for failures on the contractor's side and also more crucially stop the insistence of taking the lowest bid on the principle of "paying peanuts only gets you monkeys".
Also its also very beneficial to see what the people who would have to use the systems want from it as they will be the ones in the firing line if it fails to fulfil whats required.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MancRat
11:12 AM on 07/28/2011
meanwhile, Asian Governments have all embraced the infinitely cheaper and definitely more secure open source products that using Linux versions offers them. Do all the Government computers need hefty versions of Office on them?

Saying they need to pay for Outlook is just lazy. There are many similar applications out there that have all the required functionality of Outlook for a fraction of the cost.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
popart
retired school teacher
09:49 AM on 07/28/2011
the government aways pays far more for things than the average citizen because they are not spending their money they are spending yours...so why care?
02:53 PM on 07/28/2011
Because they are answerable to the public.
Its the main frustration of public servants that they cannot do the job they would like to often as they don't have the resources to do so or are hamstrung by regulations and the way they are implemented and managed.
A little consultation with people that use the systems can go along way to making them work better.