• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "£100 MILLION lost on failed UK.gov IT projects - in just ONE YEAR"

Collapse

  • NickFitz
    replied
    Originally posted by Batcher View Post
    £100 MILLION poured down drain on failed UK.gov IT projects - in just ONE YEAR

    Somebody forgot to negotiate a clause for a reduction in charges should sites be decommissioned early. The result was the Department was forced to continue paying for unwanted facilities, resulting in a constructive loss of £4.707m.
    That one's not a particularly good example, as it wasn't a case of any kind of IT failure - it was a management failure. The effect would have been the same if it had been a cleaning or catering contract negotiated without such a clause.

    Leave a comment:


  • Zero Liability
    replied
    Originally posted by DodgyAgent View Post
    It is very different. Within a business there are lines of accountability that ultimately end up at the shareholder's feet. No such accountability in the public sector.
    They still like to pretend we're their "customers", though.

    Leave a comment:


  • Batcher
    replied
    Originally posted by BolshieBastard View Post
    Kind of makes you wonder who does negotiate these contracts. Its rather hard to believe no one has any common sense to ask what happens if it does go tits up?
    And surely the government have teams of lawyers at their disposal that should be checking contracts before signing.

    Leave a comment:


  • BolshieBastard
    replied
    Originally posted by Batcher View Post
    £100 MILLION poured down drain on failed UK.gov IT projects - in just ONE YEAR

    Somebody forgot to negotiate a clause for a reduction in charges should sites be decommissioned early. The result was the Department was forced to continue paying for unwanted facilities, resulting in a constructive loss of £4.707m.
    Kind of makes you wonder who does negotiate these contracts. Its rather hard to believe no one has any common sense to ask what happens if it does go tits up?

    Leave a comment:


  • DodgyAgent
    replied
    Originally posted by bobspud View Post
    This is no different to most companies. Everyone changes their mind before the end of the term sometimes. No one likes to think through exit plans or plan the real business requirements on the way into a deal. Its too hard so they try and use assumptions to give shape to the solutions.

    Even less likely is successfully getting the departments to identify requirements and plot them onto the enterprise architecture plans because that takes time and is too hard for most of the people to fathom out in the timescales.

    So contracts are entered into that are never going to be right and work starts...

    After a while a new business owner turns up and changes their mind about everything because its easy to look backwards and say "That was a silly idea.... What we needed was X not Y, so lets dump Y and buy X..."

    What they call waste is nothing compared to the money they spend on things that they think are working...
    It is very different. Within a business there are lines of accountability that ultimately end up at the shareholder's feet. No such accountability in the public sector.

    Leave a comment:


  • bobspud
    replied
    This is no different to most companies. Everyone changes their mind before the end of the term sometimes. No one likes to think through exit plans or plan the real business requirements on the way into a deal. Its too hard so they try and use assumptions to give shape to the solutions.

    Even less likely is successfully getting the departments to identify requirements and plot them onto the enterprise architecture plans because that takes time and is too hard for most of the people to fathom out in the timescales.

    So contracts are entered into that are never going to be right and work starts...

    After a while a new business owner turns up and changes their mind about everything because its easy to look backwards and say "That was a silly idea.... What we needed was X not Y, so lets dump Y and buy X..."

    What they call waste is nothing compared to the money they spend on things that they think are working...

    Leave a comment:


  • DodgyAgent
    replied
    Originally posted by Batcher View Post
    £100 MILLION poured down drain on failed UK.gov IT projects - in just ONE YEAR

    Somebody forgot to negotiate a clause for a reduction in charges should sites be decommissioned early. The result was the Department was forced to continue paying for unwanted facilities, resulting in a constructive loss of £4.707m.
    Which is precisely why we should not make it easy for these people to tax us

    Leave a comment:


  • GlenW
    replied
    Originally posted by SimonMac View Post
    Why is this seen as an IT failure rather than Procurement/Legal?!
    What? You mean lawyers and civil servants made mistakes? Ridiculous idea!

    Leave a comment:


  • SimonMac
    replied
    Why is this seen as an IT failure rather than Procurement/Legal?!

    Leave a comment:


  • scooterscot
    replied
    Call my cynical, but when I first read the headline my first thought was how many vested interests exist between MP's and those companies.

    Leave a comment:


  • Zero Liability
    replied
    Could have been more beds in hospitals... or is that particular act of alchemy only possible when clamping down on "tax avoidance"?

    Leave a comment:


  • Flashman
    replied
    Originally posted by Batcher View Post
    £100 MILLION poured down drain on failed UK.gov IT projects - in just ONE YEAR

    Somebody forgot to negotiate a clause for a reduction in charges should sites be decommissioned early. The result was the Department was forced to continue paying for unwanted facilities, resulting in a constructive loss of £4.707m.

    Failure? A lot of contractors got paid for their work. Didn't fail for them thank you.

    Leave a comment:


  • £100 MILLION lost on failed UK.gov IT projects - in just ONE YEAR

    £100 MILLION poured down drain on failed UK.gov IT projects - in just ONE YEAR

    Somebody forgot to negotiate a clause for a reduction in charges should sites be decommissioned early. The result was the Department was forced to continue paying for unwanted facilities, resulting in a constructive loss of £4.707m.

Working...
X