I read with interest your article and comment on the Gateway reviews for the NHS National Programme for IT (Unheeded warnings highlight NHS flaws, www.computing.co.uk/2244750).

This large-scale programme has fundamental, but not unique, challenges. With a culture of non-accountability, no one wants to have to shoulder the responsibility for a lack of basic communication, the misinterpretation of the scheme as merely an IT project, limited ongoing buy-in from clinical staff as the programme changed, and inadequate programme and resolution management.

Effective communication is the lifeblood of any programme. If the scope and scale of the business requirements are not adequately recognised and understood, the complexity of the execution spirals, and without the hearts and minds of all stakeholders on board, there is little or no chance of success.

The view of the effort as an IT programme is also flawed. There is no such thing as an IT project. Every project has a business impact and benefit. The business case should be compelling and work for everyone. In this case, there is a substantial gap between the stated objectives and strategies of the programme and the real context in which they are delivered.

There has never been a widely accepted view of the “do-ability” of the programme. Perhaps what has been detrimental to this programme and many others is that suppliers are keen to win the business without full definition and acceptance of scope, challenge and risk.

Continuing failure to meet deadlines necessitates a fundamental change in approach to overcome root causes – for example, requirements not understood, business case not defined/believed, or a lack of delivery competency. I wonder how helpful the repeated “warnings” you mentioned have been. Do they come with remedies taking into account the deficiencies and defining what success looks like and how the programme can get back on track?

These reviews could be more proactive. Remedies must be specific and an action plan agreed with the relevant programme team. Collaboration is key – it is unclear whether or not the findings of these reviews were accepted by the people who matter. If a remedy is necessary, the governance for that review should include the execution of those remedies. If the remedies are not achieved, warning flags should be raised immediately without waiting for the next Gateway review to recognise that the same problem still exists. What is the point of project assurance if it doesn’t fix anything?

Peter Mayer

It is clear from the comments on your article that people recognise that we [the government] favour no one (Government and outsourcing – a mixed bag of issues, markkobayashihillary.computing.co.uk).

We are passionate about keeping a level playing field just as we are about bringing new entrants into the market. As your article says, this can be tough. It is both expensive and time consuming to bid and whether we like it or not, this will put off some suppliers because they are short of resources and/or money.

What matters to me is getting suppliers that are exceptionally good at not just winning business, but executing the contract.

In relation to offshoring, it is not just a political issue. The reality of government work means I must provide a high level of safety and security of citizen data as well as ensure that any application we build and then connect to a secure government network remains safe.

John Suffolk, government chief information officer

Coming just days after the bullish note struck by the Digital Britain report, this news shows just how far we have to go as a nation to increase the role played by technology (UK slips down global IT league table, www.computing.co.uk/2244252).

Despite the downturn, the UK’s largest technology companies continue to post positive results, and these show no signs of abating. Yet the size of Britain’s IT sector still pales in comparison with that of other nations. The results achieved by our top tech companies highlight the need and potential to have a larger and more influential UK IT industry, which could improve our GDP.

It is the responsibility of government and industry to ensure that technology’s recent success is used as a launchpad to make UK plc great again. While other industries have suffered in the downturn, given the right encouragement, the UK’s IT sector is well positioned to play a vital role in leading the UK out of recession.

Peter Anderton

It is important for trained and knowledgeable IT support staff to be onsite in schools, being involved with teachers, pupils, curriculum planning, the school’s management team and the local authority (LA).

Managed IT services cannot even hope to understand and be involved to such a degree. You have to be there full time and be involved to fully understand (£45bn schools plan fails to impress, www.computing.co.uk/2214495).

This need not be done with a fully outsourced IT service – it is better not to farm out IT support totally. Building Schools for the Future (BSF) should offer the best of both for schools. The schools should retain IT staff onsite, employed by the school or LA. There should be meetings and forums where the LA or a single supplier could meet with school IT managers and agree what should be supplied and how.

That way, all schools can input and innovate and work on a level playing field. Then local IT managers can liaise with the school leadership and move IT forward.

There should also be a second level of IT support available as a technical resource, working across many schools to ensure IT is being implemented in a consistent manner across the LA.

IT support should not be outsourced because of BSF, and BSF money should not be used as a noose around schools’ necks or a bribe to encourage them to make bad choices.

Phil Halliwell

This government is determined to wipe out small IT companies (Government procurement rule worries small IT suppliers, www.computing.co.uk/2243088).

This is just another way of making sure that all public sector contracts are awarded to their friends – such as the big IT service providers – which will export the jobs and money wherever they can, and import people from the third world with fast-tracked visas wherever they cannot.

Small companies that cannot offer directorships or consultancies to failed/ retired politicians/senior public servants are never included in government lists of preferred suppliers, even though the majority of UK IT staff are employed in such firms. Of course, they are mainly on the dole now, and about to be joined by thousands of new IT graduates.

This government has to go, and the record of government IT contracts that have failed shows the “preferred list” should go with them.

Reg, submitted on the web

I called in to my doctors and asked to see my notes – to my horror there were 20 years of notes missing and incorrect information logged (Privacy watchdog concerned over electronic health records, www.computing.co.uk/2241874).

I went to my local MP and he said the same thing had happened to him and not to be concerned. But I am concerned – there are lots of things that are not correct either with my hospital notes or GP notes.

I just do not believe any of them. Where has all my information gone? No one seems in the slightest bit interested.

Gail Curtain

The government’s new proposal to have greater IT access in primary schools is all very laudable, but will it be a long-term, sustainable project or an eye-catching, one-off political strategy (Educating a workforce for the future, www.computing.co.uk/2242223)?

Laptops For Teachers was, on the surface, a good idea. But when those laptops reached the end of their useful lifecycle, who was left with the bill for replacing them? Schools, of course. As they will be the next time, and the time after that. Too many people view IT projects as a one-off investment rather than something requiring constant investment on a cycle of replacement.

Tony Forder

The issues affecting ContactPoint are not about data security – which will never be achieved anyway – the point is that most children don’t need this “protection” (Children’s database hit by problems, www.computing.co.uk/2239150).

The information itself is so woefully inaccurate and often vindictive that the database will cause misery to ordinary families, without helping seriously abused children one jot. Families in crisis need financial and practical support, not policing. The £250m would have been better spent by allocating £5,000 to each child in crisis.

Gary Orman

Whatever measures are included in the proposed identity cards to ensure security will instantly become a target for criminals and terrorists around the world (Gateway reviews must look at privacy, www.computing.co.uk/2211261). Any type of identity card, when illegally duplicated, has the effect of legitimising illegal activity.

Ask anyone involved in physical security and they will attest to the fact that in general, if someone appears to have a legitimate pass, it tends to allay the suspicions of those who are supposed to be on the lookout for criminals and terrorists.

Paul Vine

When will the government wake up to the fact that to benefit from the internet you need to be able to read web content and understand what it means (Government to flesh out primary school IT teaching plans). Also, numeracy skills are required to be able to interpret the numbers thrown at you.

Not only that, but using the internet also requires keyboard skills and a certain level of intellectual development.

I fear that if we’re not careful we will end up with children who can only talk in a form of shorthand learned by texting and using chat rooms.

I watched a child being taught mathematical skills using Microsoft Excel and he had to type in SUM followed by the cells containing the data. But did he understand what he was doing? And what if he gets his spelling wrong? And yet this child could not add up numbers on a piece of paper without transferring it to a spreadsheet. No wonder people get into debt if they cannot understand numbers on a statement.
Children must be taught basic skills first and then computing can be introduced when appropriate. Computing and the internet are tools available to teachers – IT is not the god of learning it is made out to be.

Vincent Offer