The blind leading the sighted and then poking their eye out.
Speaking as someone who actually has to deliver public sector IT contracts the one thing I can say is that no one sets out to fail, but the system is stacked against us. Government IT is usually specified by a small number of very well connected private consultancies, who don't have to deliver, at the request of politicians who have no idea how to deliver and base it on their policies which often have no foundation in practical reality. All, including Capita and Atos, point out the flaws in the requirements when bidding, and are generally ignored because to change will slow the procurement, but we'll change the contract after award. Now there's a world of pain, and frequently, after award will refuse to change the contract.
Frankly it amazes me that we manage to deliver as many good systems as we do (>50%), but then, when we do, it's usually because the client actually listens to us, and us to them. As soon as we get into the blame game, things really start to go wrong. Government IT is usually under bid by us as well, aided and abetted by the clients consultants who usually tell the government it will cost them less than it actually will. Things will only get better when the government actually has its own IT people who understand their businesses , and how much things actually cost, so that companies that under bid can be excluded from the bidding process as much as those who over bid.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
