Re: Not a big problem?
I agree with your analysis of the numbers*, and risk/return ratios, and as a general principle it's an aproach more people should take. But I think here the key point is in your final sentence - "costing more than just writing off the loss if they fail". If CDS fails, there'll be goods rotting on the docksides, patients dying in hospitals and factories standing idle. If MTD goes up the spout you'll have a major cashflow problem for government in the short term, followed by significant impacts on "taxpayer morale" for years to come - not to mention the direct impacts on business trying to cope with it. So on this occasion, I think it is a matter of concern that these key "enabling technologies" might fall over.
*There may well be key distinction between "government's major IT programmes" and "143 government programmes" - I've seen people caught out by the NAO press team's approach to drafting press releases before now, but don't have the time to read the full report on this occasion to check. However, reference to "39 IT projects worth £18.6bn" suggests IT projects average £0.5bn approx; the remaining 104 "programmes" are worth £436bn between them - so a risk of comparing apples to oranges if we're not careful.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
