Should've gone to Specsavers!
This is a very short-sighted move by the Met, no doubt fuelled by someone's bonus target. Firstly, predicted savings are always guesstimates at best, and even then, they always specify the best case scenario so dont expect anywhere near this amount of savings.
Secondly, contracting to anything IT related for more than 3 years is massively risky given the rate of change in IT let alone any business change. The Met (and its IT needs) will be a very different place in 10 years, just like its very different now to how it was 10 years ago. However, expect any desire to keep pace with that change to be met with a change to the contract. Kerching! Those savings dont look so rosy anymore.
Finally, even if the outsourcer accepted changes, it will never deliver at the same pace as would happen with an internal team. There are so many more hurdles to jump through and red tape to cut when trying to effect change via an outsourcer than an in-house resource.
Still, at least the director responsible for pushing this through will still get his bonus and move onto a new juicy position well before this dodgy contract falls to pieces.