IT giants 'ripping off Whitehall', say MPs • Hacker News Board

Re: IT giants 'ripping off Whitehall', say MPs

#21

Post by arethuza » Thu, Jul 28, 2011, 2:56 PM UTC

gaius wrote: post #17

quanticle wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not that they don't care. Its that they don't know any better. Look, these people are probably less tech-savvy than your parents. As far as they're concerned, those little boxes on or underneath their desks are magic . Now, given that, do you really expect them make informed and rational decisions about how much a computer should cost to install and maintain?

They are paid to care. That's their job. They are custodians of the public purse. We castigate irresponsible bankers - civil servants should not be excempt.

And senior civil servants are paid very well, have bomb proof generous pensions and pretty much total job security.

Just a little of bit of competence doesn't seem a lot to ask.

Re: IT giants 'ripping off Whitehall', say MPs

#22

Post by ZoFreX » Thu, Jul 28, 2011, 3:07 PM UTC

wisty wrote: post #19

ZoFreX wrote: post #8

"In its report, the public administration committee recommends that departments across Whitehall use more small and medium-sized IT suppliers to increase competition and bring down prices." This is exactly what already happens, not that I think MPs know about it. I've personally worked on and even in some cases BUILT government websites, yet you won't find my name or my employer's (at the time) name on their books. T…

The big company probably eats the risk of the small company stuffing up, or the government changing requirements halfway through the project. They also do all the unexciting tender work, certifications, negotiations, rainmaking, etc. If a government employee asked a savvy web dev to scope out and implement a solution, it would be cheap. But they can't work that way. The project has to be specified upfront, in advance…

> The big company probably eats the risk of the small company stuffing up

Completely the other way around, actually - our business relationship with the larger company was that we fixed their messes, some of which were gov contracts. Their sub-par developers would hack something together which eventually collapsed under its own weight, at which point they'd try to sell it anyway. If the client didn't accept it, we would then be brought in to close all the blocking bugs.

> or the government changing requirements halfway through the project

I don't think we were very insulated from this, but obviously by definition I can't tell you anything that we were shielded from!

Re: IT giants 'ripping off Whitehall', say MPs

#23

Post by jacques_chester » Thu, Jul 28, 2011, 3:28 PM UTC

gmac wrote: post #11

ZoFreX wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or the people that deliberately organised purchasing things in a convoluted manner that channels taxpayer's money to a few preferred companies, in a manner that while increasing our actual debt, puts it on different books, so we don't look quite as in debt as we are.

In the UK, that would be PFI or PPP (Private Finance Initiative and Public-Private Partnership)? These are indeed a dog's dinner... for which we can blame only the people some of us elected.

Here in Australia the latest version is to form a corporation wholly owned by the government, to take on massive debts through that corporation, but then a) refuse to release details of what it's up to, citing "commercial-in-confidence" and b) leaving it off the government's balance sheet, even though everyone knows who the debt really belongs to.

The first example I saw was in the Northern Territory in 2000 when the Power and Water Authority was "corporatised". Something similar is happening with NBN Co, which while representing The Greatest Infrastructure Investment Evar, will also apparently Cost Nothing, Honest.