Re: *Decades* of resellers, consultants and consultants have...
He would not have answered that question since evasion is a technique he appears well skilled at...
56 publicly visible posts • joined 24 Jun 2009
This is spot on regarding procurement, with the big IT vendors historically amassing huge profits from the public purse. Even when they are shown to be delivering a system late and falling far short of requirements. Look at Fujitsu and the whole Post Office debacle. They had a proof of concept code mish mash, not fit for mass rollout, yet applied huge pressure on the UK Government to take it.
The problem is exacerbated, to use your own language, by there being arseholes on the public sector procurement side. Individuals with insufficient appropriate training, skills, ability, knowledge or experience to deal with IT procurement but with the arrogance to believe they can. Procuring a complex software system, especially one with bespoke modifications is an extremely challenging thing to do and giving the task to someone experienced at sourcing paper clips is a recipe for failure. So the underlying problem is incompetence due to people being in the wrong jobs. In my experience people rarely turn down a more senior role on the grounds they are not sufficiently competent to do it.
It beggars belief that this guy was hired as CTO, and managing the IT activity.
As far as I can see he has:
1) No academic training/knowledge of software technology
2) Zero experience of developing code himself
3) Zero experience of managing a software development group
4) Zero experience of procuring software from a 3rd party
Yet again, a person in the wrong job. Appointed to a senior and extremely well compensated role for which lacks the required skills, abilities, knowledge and experience to do it properly.
Sadly, you have hit the nail on the head.
Procuring bespoke software is not the same as sourcing as paperclips. It is an extremely challenging task and even when undertaken by someone with decades of relevant skills, ability and experience has at best about 50% chance of delivering on time and budget. Assigning this task to someone who has little or no relevant skills, ability and experience is a recipe for disaster as we see time and again with Government/Public Sector IT projects. The IT vendor makes huge profits delivering something which is usually late and over budget and then enjoys years of additional work and obscene profit fixing the problems. And because it all gets funded by the taxpayer no-one on the procurement side faces any level of accountability.
This was basically the cause of the Post Office Scandal.
I would have thought HP's lawyers had a watertight case before going down the road of extradition.
Unless it was HP's strategy all along to simply wear him down and hurt him publicly and financially on the basis their pockets will always bel deeper than his, even though the acquisition left him fabulously wealthy.
"I'm slightly confused by the difference between the Parliamentary Committee and the Statutory Inquiry. A summary of the evidence for the Inquiry should be good enough for the Committee...
I believe one difference between a Statutory Inquiry and a Parliamentary Committee is that witnesses take an oath for the former once they take the stand, swearing that their evidence will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Thus if they lie they are committing the crime of perjury. The same does not apply for a hearing in front of a Parliamentary Committee and people are able to lie profusely without fear of prosecution. I believe it is correct to say that evidence exists proving Paula Vennells and her sidekick did that at a former hearing but apart from being judged in terms of character and reputation they will not incur criminal charges.
Nick Read is an utter disgrace and his public appearances continue to be widely lambasted on social media as shameful and appalling. The only thing he has said so far at any of these hearings where there is no doubt that he is telling the whole truth is that he is very well paid. Obscenely so, in fact. £800K per year of taxpayers money. One has to question the recruitment process behind appointing such an individual and the justification for such a huge burden on the public purse.
Spot on.
The consequences of people doing a job for which they lack the requisite levels of skills, ability, knowledge, training and experience to do competently.
Once you add arrogance, greed and the primal instinct to deny wrongdoing and cover one's own backside at all costs to the mix you end up with a horribly tragic disaster like this one.
I'm sure a lot of the early erroneous decisions that were made which resulted in Horizon being deployed were the result of a widespread level of ignorance. Ignorance of software technology, how a software product is specified, developed, deployed and maintained. That is understandable and forgivable to an extent. What cannot be forgiven is the fact that once it became clear that Horizon was unfit for purpose, resulting in accounting errors and people being falsely charged and convicted, a whole group of people conspired to cover it up and misappropriated huge sums of public money to do so. Which continues to this day.
No, and it is sad to see that for decades the Government and Civil Service have appeared incapable of handling these huge IT vendors who make massive profits from the public purse whilst producing deliverable which are not fit for purpose and both late and over budget.
The fly in the ointment is the burden of proof. Many PO employees have already taken the stand and lied through their teeth. Their victims (the Sub postmasters) know it but without documentary evidence it is just hearsay for anyone to challenge and refute what is said under oath. And it has been shown that the Post Office started shredding documents once they knew that they had wrongly prosecuted people.
Vennells has manoeuvred herself into the corner on this one...or has she?
She would have returned it a long time ago if she had any hint of integrity whatsoever, and we all know the response to that one.
If she had returned it in the early days of the inquiry, it would be interpreted by some as her admitting culpability of wrongdoing, which she continues to vehemently deny.
But now the strength of public opinion on this gives her the copout of returning it under protest that she has done nothing wrong but is bowing to public pressure since she is such a good person and has the wellbeing of the nation and the Post Office in her blood.
Ye gods, I saw plenty of BS during the 4 decades I spent working in the high tech industry. The executive guys with plenty to say who usually deliver very little beyond talking up their own capability; "...the glass is permanently half full.." brigade who reclassify and redefine every problem or disaster as something great and wonderful. But "anti pedestrian dragging" as a feature????
The fundamental issue with all the public sector disasters we see is that the people appointed to manage them are incompetent. They lack the skills, knowledge, ability, experience, track record, and training to do the job they're doing yet somehow get appointed to the position anyway. So whilst they are the immediate cause of the cock-up, the solution lies in tackling recruitment in the bigger picture. The same happens in the private sector of course but there corrective action has to occur within otherwise the enterprise will go under. In the public sector it's always the taxpayer who takes the hit whilst the mess continues by putting out the message "We're sorry, we made mistakes, we know have to do better, lessons have been learned...." And the band plays on. It's high time that society stopped treating the public purse as a bottomless pit to make the chosen few rich and failing to ensure cost-effective and successful delivery of the projects it bankrolls.
The problem is top down as always....
It appears at the top of the Civil Service you get obscenely rewarded, a job for life, a gold-plated pension and no accountability whatsoever. When you screw up big time there's an enquiry funded by the taxpayer which is a complete whitewash. The key summary is "yes, we made a mistake, we are deeply sorry, we know we have to do better, lessons have been learned..." and then on we go. If you are high enough in the pyramid and manage to screw up on a consistent basis you can eventually be sure of an honour in the New Years List...
People paid on the public purse are in a no lose job for life. When they ####-up the organisation says "We sincerely apologise...we know we have to do better...lessons have been learned...". Then the organisations get fined, which is also paid from the public purse. Onwards and upwards...
Then you can expect lifelong salary increases far beyond your value whilst consistently claiming you could earn even more in the private sector. No-one will challenge this and call your bluff. If you're really lucky you belong to one of those special public sector clubs allowed to collectively set their own rewards. Like MPs for instance.
If you screw up really bad, you will be promoted and moved sideways so that you can screw up in a whole new area.
Ultimately you can get a reward in the New Year Honours list for serial failure.
What's not to like?
And also there needs to be personal consequences for those responsible. What on earth is the point of the ICO or anyone else fining a public funded organisation where the taxpayer is footing the bill.
I am sick of hearing the "We sincerely apologise...mistakes were made...we know we have to do better...lessons have been learned..." rhetoric. It's just a catch-all for the freedom to repeatedly screw-up without accountability.
He also said ""We regret that sufficient protections were not in place .."
So that's alright then. "We apologies...we sincerely regret our mistake...we know we have to do better...lessons have been learned.." Off to collect my bonus....yawn...etc.
It is truly stunning how widespread incompetence is becoming. It must be one of the fastest growing Corporate attributes in the modern world.
All are well worth reading - there is much which simply isn't being reported by the media in general, and even where they are doing so, they are not going into sufficient depth to really convey the full horror of it all.....
It's clear that the media has been soundly threatened into near silence over the course of this travesty by the Post Office's thugs [expensive lawyers] funded by the taxpayer
Not just PO Management and Fujitsu...it's a safe bet that individuals in Government and the Civil Service knew full well that Horizon was a pile of pooh, the prosecutions were unsafe, and were complicit in mis-spending > 100M of taxpayers' to cover it up. There are many keeping their heads down and hoping for it all to go away...
You are spot on and sadly this happens all the time...
People employed to ride the publicly funded gravy train rarely if ever face the consequences of their misconduct and/or incompetence.
In cases where there is a lot of public dissatisfaction the response is to launch a public which takes an inordinately long time and again costs the taxpayers a fortune. And the result is usually:
- we're very sorry for the inconvenience
- we know we have to do better
- mistakes were made
- lessons were learned
Jobs are kept, bonuses are paid, and on we go...until the next ****-up
You have to admire these big-time visionaries with grandiose dreams usually backed up by poor track records of having actually achieved anything. They still manage to pull in huge investments from people who should know better to fund wildly optimistic ideas that many an engineer or anyone with a large dollop of common sense would say "that'll never fly..."
My observation of working in tech for many decades, and I may be wrong and stand to be corrected, is that investors appear to be doing even less due diligence now than in the past, and certainly far less than they should be doing. Is this a natural consequence of our species and society become ever more affluent...we can afford and accept huge losses on the basis that one of these projects might just deliver?
You are so right in your observations and analysis. The older and wiser you become, the more evident it is. But why does this happen…? Because our species is fatally flawed and, in any situation, “looking after no.1” and greed enter the picture. And the more affluent, rich, civilised, and successful we become as a species, the more extreme the behaviour to lie, cheat, and cover-up the screw-ups.
Nowhere is it more visible than in the Public Sector where incompetent buffoons head up the activity and are handsomely rewarded for failure on the grounds “I could earn much more in the Private Sector….”
When I share this with other people, I often get labelled as cynical. However, it was the great George Bernard Shaw who famously said, “The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who haven’t got it.”.
True, but when it goes horribly wrong in the Public Sector it's our taxes which are constantly footing the bill, and nobody is held accountable. So the rhetoric about "...mistakes were made" and "...lessons will be learned" is complete garbage and nothing ever changes
Exactly...we need a policy of zero tolerance on this.
Anyone, absolutely anyone found accessing records they shouldn't be, or leaving USBs on trains etc. should be dismissed instantly with no chance of re-employment in the health system ever. Applied to all, from the lowliest support staff up to the best brain surgeon in the country.
But banning Directors doesn't work....
I came across someone who was kicked off the Directors List and banned from starting another company and then went straight ahead and did it with absolutely no problem.
You only have to look on companies house and search for this guy Roberto Milanesi to see that he has multiple profiles on there, and a history of repeatable failure. The database is a shambles....
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/search?q=Roberto+Milanesi