Anybody...
That thinks BSF is going nowhere doesn't know what they're talking about. Likewise anybody that thinks that the NHS IT program isn't worthwhile.
The issue here is not that the programs should be cut, it's that the people who put the contracts together should have been long since fired and should never be able to negotiate contracts in any field ever again.
The IT contractors involved in some of these programs start with a budget 10x the size it needs to be, with a overly-long delivery schedual, then take 10 times longer than agreed and keep comming back for more cash and are never punished. We can also bet that if they threaten to go bust they'll be bailed-out too.
These systems need schedual punishments written into the contracts (every day you go over you pay the taxpayer 500k etc) and any extra costs should be made to be bourne by the contractor. This is the only reasonable way to make them think about under-staffing the projects or undercutting other contractors and ladling the real cost on the back-end. It also happens to be what happens in private business (well, the good ones anyways).
Some of the projects were worthless from day one also, they can go right out the window.
Overall the idea is right, just the implimentation is wrong, the NHS can't spend the next 80 years in the stone age passing paper records around, it also makes medical research REALLY hard to find space for and costs a fortune to store 60+ million people's worth of medical notes (with multiple copies of each - GP, local hospital, specialist at another hospital etc). That's a LOT of trees, and they become very disjointed.
"Because my daughters records are still passed around as a wallet full of notes" - Indeed, hence the issue. It's not the *idea* :)