Well done everyone
Helping to fund my HP Pension (sic). Currently worth a grand total of £48.54 a year. Enough for a few pints and that is it.
The government spends billions of pounds on IT every year. While individual projects often make the news when investigated by auditors and select committees, the overall picture is less well-known. But it IS big business – both because of how much is spent, but also because just a few big businesses suck up very large amounts …
As they run the network that most providers use to deliver communications services all of the systems integrators named as well as most of BTs rivals in the retail space will still use them wholesale. It won't be as lucrative as directly holding the contract, but I'm sure it adds up to more than the difference between BT and HP in that list.
But your point is what, exactly?
You seem to conclude by suggesting we replace the whole of HMG with a copy of Microsoft Office 2010 per person. But that can't really be what you're suggesting, is it? UK government implemented in a vastly distributed VBA macro?
MS versus HMG: My cynicism circuits are overloading here.
What's that you say?
The reality is they have an army of sub contractors and 1 man companies who do the work and all they really provide is the "client management" (IE Schmoozing senior civil servants and Ministers and of course billing services).
I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.*
* And that will continue while the civil service continues it's addiction to the monster everything-and-the-kitchen-sink contract with no cancellation or penalty clauses.
Having worked with numerous Govt contracts I have yet to see one that does not contain cancellation and penalty clauses. In fact the complaint from industry is that Govt contract can be overly punitive.
Biggest reason suppliers get away without having contracts cancelled is because often the cause of the problems is not solely the responsibility of the supplier.
With respect to penalties, English law precludes the inclusion of penalties in contracts. A failure under a contract can do no more than put the purchaser back in the position it would have been in if it had not entered into the contract, and see my previous point on that issue.
All Govt contracts like those in the private sector include SLAs and Service Credits these latter items represent the value that the missing of a specific SLA has on the business. In reality these cannot be set to high as doing so would preclude suppliers from wanting to do the business as the risks would be to great.
Aspire is a Special Purpose Vehicle in which Capgemini is the prime contractor, Fujitsu the secondary contractor with responsibility for infrastructure and BT the subordinate secondary with responsibility for telecomms. This was put in place in reaction to the previous contract with a single supplier, EDS, which was not deemed successful.
The contractual position has been renegotiated since the creation of Aspire to allow SMEs to bid for work packages that would previously have been exclusively reserved for the Aspire companies.
An interesting slant that you have on this - all of which is public domain information by the way.
Another interesting question might be 'how many people do these government departments retain to manage the suppliers work on these contracts?' .................. history says that it will be thousands rather than tens or hundreds, all of whom will be on pretty good T&Cs and pensions out of the public purse.
AC @ 13:15
As a yardstick, when the then Inland Revenue IT function was privatised in 1994 there were 1800-odd staff employed to deliver the entire service, including the cleaners and the security guards.
By 2000 there were over 3000 employed by EDS to deliver the IR service with 2000 civil servants managing the contract.
After the merger of the Inland Revenue and Her Majesty's Customs and Excise to form HMRC and the agglomeration of the IT contracts, things topped out at over 5000 IT bods with 3000 civil servants managing the contract.
As things stand right now, there are over 4000 IT personnel working for various companies and 2000 civil servants either managing the contract or, intriguingly, developing pilot systems up to a near-roll-outable state.
The thing which has bothered me for years (almost ten so please don't just blame it on the Tories) is that HP and Dell desktops, and HP printers (in which only genuine HP toners are used), are bought with a three year warranty, yet scrap them just 18 months on.
Sadly I've not been able to obtain how much they let these go for, but there's no shortage of companies taking advantage and selling them on. I often buy the HP printers which have been in the NHS, most with an incredible low print count and full of almost new HP toners. Some companies even give them away free if you buy a certain amount of toners.
Why on earth are organisations like Remploy not handling this and selling them on?
I'm interested in the assertion that "the NHS" scraps printers and in fact computers after 18 months. Where?
I just raise it because "The NHS" is a billing structure and brand, not an organisation. Each trust is pretty much totally independent, so don't assume that what one NHS area does will be anything like what another does.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019