Once again public sector IT is in the news, and not in a good way.

A group of academics say the £6bn National Programme for NHS IT (NPfIT), now two years into its 10-year lifespan, is fundamentally flawed and should be paused for an independent review.

Computing is by no means universally forgiving of government technology. Clearly if problems are irremediable, good money should not be thrown after bad.

But it is becoming too easy to dismiss every challenge as a crisis. That the phrase ‘government IT programme’ has become synonymous with disaster is a disaster in itself. After all, what is the alternative? Stick with paper and pens?

A common theme in arguments against identity cards is the government’s poor record with IT. There may be many reasons not to pursue an ID scheme, but that it might be difficult to do is a paltry one.

The sad thing is that even if it is only partially successful, or takes twice as long as it should, NPfIT will still provide the NHS with world-leading technology.

But just as citizens can think the economy into recession, so hysteria about NPfIT may be a self-fulfilling prophecy – leading to less commitment, less thought about how to make the most of the systems and, ultimately, less success.

Saddest of all, if enough voices shout loud enough, the programme will become a political liability and the plug will be pulled for the worst possible reasons with no regard for reality.

NPfIT is undoubtedly slower and more difficult than expected. But NHS sources say the problems are not flaws in the design, but management errors and an almost irresponsibly optimistic timetable. As one senior source puts it: ‘The strategy is right, they just over-egged the expectations.’

This is indeed a lesson that should have been learned. But to sacrifice the whole scheme is equally irresponsible.

The issue is not just public relations, it is about understanding. Technolog y is still seen as just another form of engineering. But IT systems are not like bridges – they are a tool, not an entity.

Arguably, giving NPfIT a name, a set of dates and a separate organisation was setting it up as a target for failure.

Technology is a process, with no clear start, no clear end and ever-shifting goalposts. And as fast as IT itself evolves, the potential uses of it morph and multiply. There is no end date. The bridge is never built.

But that does not mean it is a disaster. That is simply how it should be.

What do you think? Email us at: feedback@computing.co.uk