HMRC Fiasco: Am I Being Naiive?

[Lucifer Box]

From the CUK front page:

HM Revenue & Customs should have hired a freelance IT worker to delete the most sensitive details from the child benefit dataset that it lost in the post.

Speaking to MPs yesterday, acting Lib Dem leader Vince Cable said the details of 25million Brits could have been desensitised by a freelance IT specialist at a cost of £10,000.

The Revenue’s refusal to pay for any data filtering means the cost to taxpayers could now be far greater, as Mr Cable said each person’s identity has a black market value of £60.

He pointed to e-mails from HMRC revealing the department was not prepared to pay its own IT contractor company, EDS, or an IT contractor worker, to filter the dataset.

“We must make use of data we hold,” a tax official wrote, in an e-mail dated March 13, 2007, in answer to the NAO’s request of filtering the data before sending it for audit.

The official added: “[We must] not over burden the business by asking them to run additional data scans/filters that may incur a cost to the department.”

Now we have been led to believe that all the NAO wanted was a list of the names and NI numbers on the CHB database (they are undertaking an NI audit in an attempt to weed out the duplicates).

To my mind this is as simple as SELECT name, ni_number from taxpayer_details

Now I know I'm not an SAP, .net or tape changing guru like many of you lot, but £10k to do that? Puh-lease.

[BrowneIssue]

Executive summary:
£100 for the query. £9,900 for the peace of mind.

The original waffle:
Working for ClientCo a few years ago they had some CAD-type data that required cleaning, some reasonably complex maths applied (A level Applied Maths level), re-evaluated onto different origins and then cross referenced against another set. Nobody at ClientCo could do it.

They shopped around the specialist firms and got a best deal of £26k from one of their existing suppliers.

I heard about it, fell off my chair and did it myself in 7 working days. (Then got moaned at for not spending those 7 days doing what I should have been doing but couldn't do because I was waiting on this data being sorted out.)

Lesson: do not volunteer to do specialist work WITHOUT AGREEING A SPECIALIST RATE FOR DOING IT.

Stupid, stupid, stupid me. £10k for writing a query? I'll do it for a sticky bun, me.

But do you want a subject area specialist that will guarantee your national data set is 100% right and have documented quality processes to back that up and shed loads of insurance 'just in case'?

Ooo, perhaps, £10k to you as a special offer? Bargain.

[wendigo100]

It wasn't to change any data, just spew out a couple of columns. I suspect even I could do that.

[BoredBloke]

My guess is that it was too big for Excel and so they had nobody there who could do it.

[wendigo100]

Andy White could do it!

[DimPrawn]

£500 of the query and £9500 for the premium on the £1bn liability insurance you would need for going near the data.

HTH

[BoredBloke]

Andy White could do it!

lol - No he couldn't. Not unless I gave him step by step instructions. Did I tell you I saw hime when working at Stockley Park. Obviously I ignored the little baldy ficker.

[The Lone Gunman]

I have been astounded by this story since it broke.
First that they could lose sensitive data in such a manner, then we hear that the sensitive bits of te data were not even required, then when I read threadeds thing about the cost,.
How can this happen and how can the cost be so ridiculous. Surely the delivered system is capable of allowing the user to extract the data they need and only the data they need. Surely there are safeguards in place to stop the data being "lost".

We all know just how much of a cock up this is and how easy it could have been.

Why does our government insist on employing expensive second rate suppliers who consistently fail to deliver? We even pay them extra on the contract when thye over run.

Why dos nobody raise the obvious on the opposition benches or in the press?

[TheFaQQer]

Why dos nobody raise the obvious on the opposition benches or in the press?

Because the only party that could do it would be the Lib Dems, and no-one listens to them.

Tories are as bad in terms of government IT so it's a given about how they will get fleeced.

[DimPrawn]

I have been astounded by this story since it broke.
First that they could lose sensitive data in such a manner, then we hear that the sensitive bits of te data were not even required, then when I read threadeds thing about the cost,.
How can this happen and how can the cost be so ridiculous. Surely the delivered system is capable of allowing the user to extract the data they need and only the data they need. Surely there are safeguards in place to stop the data being "lost".

We all know just how much of a noddy up this is and how easy it could have been.

Why does our government insist on employing expensive second rate suppliers who consistently fail to deliver? We even pay them extra on the contract when thye over run.

Why dos nobody raise the obvious on the opposition benches or in the press?

Because the well known suppliers are well in with the government ministers. Some are even ex-board members. Brown envelopes stuffed to the brim with £50's at every meeting change hands.

And anyway, IT'S ONLY TAX PAYERS MONEY and the middle classes can afford it, clearly.

HTH