Whilst the humour in this is all good fun, the fact this was listed tells you exactly how quality assured G-Cloud is. It's not.
72 posts • joined 26 Mar 2014
DEFRA don't know what they are doing
GDS really don't know what they are doing
GDS are ideologues, who put rate their mantras more highly than risk control
GDS use 'spend controls' to bully departments
GDS abdicate responsibility by never actually saying what they will do
Liam Maxwell failed hideously
Costs went up
Risks went up
Yet we definitely need to fund them for another £450m because they save money.
And we need to adopt Government as a Platform because its a good idea (by a book publisher)
But it's OK. Because you've got a Macbook. And insecure Google Mail.
Public sector IT, you are about to be even more fucked than ever before.
Re: MOJ's move under the £1.2bn FITS deal to disaggregate its IT outsourcing contract is also going badly
That means GDS can point to this and force them to split up into even small chucks and really fuck it up. And CCS can 'help' with the complex transactions team too! Result!
YAY! GO GDS! YAY! GO CCS! YAY! GO MOJ!
I'm with CCS here on this.
One of the premises behind G-Cloud is regular recompetition. If you can just extend and expand ad infinitum, you're not driving any market or value.
The problem though is what it is touted as being. From a supplier's perspective, its a licence to sell in any way you like. But it's not that at all. It's a licence for the buyer to buy the defined services. Making it clear the terms of that licence is probably appropriate.
Not as good as Crown Commercial Service savings though.
My favourite of theirs....
"As digital services are generally a new service with no previous spend to compare against the benefit methodology is to take an average of all bids under the tender and compare to the winning bid."
Irrespective of market rates or proper benchmarking, we add 'em up, divide it and take away. Savings guaranteed!
How many more times are El Reg going to publish this nonsense where apples and oranges are compared?
For a start, the police are covered by the Microsoft/CCS MOU so there is only one price for all of that. And then what will change is how they are buying it to suit local needs and when. Some might be 'getting their Microsoft free;. When they are on 'holiday' and sweating a perpetual asset.
"He said one of the "low hanging fruits" for IT savings would include plans to start consolidating licensing contracts, mainly with Oracle and Microsoft"
So now you get an NHS CfH 'Enterprise Licence' which you have to renew in full every few years because someone always wants something.
Total goes up, not down.
It can't be put through a CCS framework. CCS is an instrument of the Government. Parliament must be independent of Government. Hence Parliament has its own procurement function and can't touch any of the frameworks of CCS or any other public body for that matter.
"However, the system is not officially fully live – under the GDS “digital by default service standard”, the system is still in beta test phase" according to Computer Weekly
What the f**k? You're telling me that the system running the payments to farmers is actually hasn't come out of test???
The question is how agile was it? Very, apparently. So agile you can do it on paper.
YAY! GO GDS!
More seriously, when will someone stop all of this nonsense? This stuff actually matters. It's not lastminute.com trying a new feature on a website. It's just not the same.
And this multi-supplier stuff is dreadful to manage commercially. Who is actually now responsible for this failure? I suspect no-one can actually be sued.
So any chance we can take the real lessons stop this crap before we do the same to HMRC and destroy our nation's ability to collect tax?
Complete disaggregation, 'Government as a Platform' and in-house 'apps' built by GDS or the local 'Digital' team.
Now let's be fair. Apart from the 'Government as a Platform' buzzword bingo (which seems to me to be just some re-usable apps for common tasks (which there's probably commercial software for already)), that;s how things used to be done. But it relies on....
1) In-house capacity and capability to run IT
2) High level procurement skills
3) High level contract management skills
Good luck with that.
I'm not exactly a fan of GDS but this is even more twaddle than they could produce (except the discussion on how to pronounce GOV.uk). It seems to me this is two blokes who 'built' G-Cloud (whatever built means in terms of delivering not very much but a dodgy framework agreement and an unrealistic 'cloud-first' policy) not liking their dubious legacy being eroded. Oh dear. How sad. Never mind.
YAY! GO GDS! YAY! GO SELF-SERVING TWONKS!
You're confusing the technology licensing with the EBS licensing. The tech will either be by processor or by NUP. I suspect the former but I don't know.
There's then another set of licences to use the ERP. That's what's being paid by use and will be pennies per 'licence'. It was, at one point, the standard way of licensing purchase orders and expense management as it kept it simple.
El Reg and others (including HMG themselves who produced the chart in here http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/public-sector/2011/11/oracle-has-70-per-cent-of-soft.html) have done this article before and made the same mistake of conflating two very different licences and adding them up to give a single number. It's completely erroneous to do that conflation. Apples =/= pears.
Not strange when you know what they are doing. They're licensing the database either by processor or application user and EBS on a transaction basis then El Reg are conflating them all as 'Oracle licences' as though they are equivalent. Which they're not.
They're still overpaying though.
Jesus. They've got nearly 50(!) senior civil servants and over 700 staff to run a few frameworks and execute a (pretty rubbish) managed service......
As a ratio type comparison:
1) In 2010, there were around 5,000 SCS out of 500,000 staff. To manage and run defence, justice, the benefits system. Or 1 in 100.
2) In 2012, GPS (CCS mk 1) had around 7 SCS and a staff of around 350. 1 in 50, so not great then.
3) Now, it's ratio is 1 in 13! But it's OK. They have a Director of Innovation.
YAY! GO CCS!
It doesn't just apply to safety critical systems.
It's not OK to agilely develop the benefits system and see if it works or not and potentially have people unable to pay to eat, clothe themselves and keep a roof over their head.
It's not OK to agilely develop the tax system and see if it works or not and potentially some paying too much, some not at all and the country unable to service itself.
It's not OK to agilely develop a patient facing system and have people's heathcare potentially jeopardised in 'user research'.
Yes. Agile can be great. I've worked on XP and Scrum projects myself. And GDS can do that beautifully on the three millionth reskin of Gov.UK.
But to say that we should use it for much of what Government (and public sector) IT does is madness, IMO.
Now, if you believe this should be in-sourced, then that's a different debate and one which is definitely worth having. And even if it should be outsourced, you can argue that the contractual model is wrong. But, for me, agile in much of this is plain wrong.
You clearly haven't read the leader in The Times.
From NATS mission critical, real time systems to GDS in one easy step...... I really do wish people had some sort of a clue before commenting, especially in a broadsheet.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021