MPs demand greater transparency for government IT projects

MPs want more openness on IT

An influential committee of MPs is calling for greater openness in major government IT projects to ensure that departments do more to learn from their mistakes.

The Commons Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has renewed a demand for publication of Gateway reviews, the project monitoring reports produced in secret by Whitehall buying agency the Office of Government Commerce (OGC).

The MPs’ report, drawing on evidence from the former Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (now replaced by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills), the Cabinet Office and the National School of Government, praised projects such as e-Passports but criticised poor sharing of knowledge across organisational boundaries, risk-averse attitudes and a failure to build learning and innovation into staff appraisals.

The report said MPs had previously argued for increased transparency in respect of Gateway reviews, and cited the example of the US government, which publishes details of programmes that are not performing.

"The reviews will be more effective if they are published and their conclusions shared across government, in keeping with the spirit of the US government’s ExpectMore.gov web site,” said the report.

"OGC should also analyse systematically the available data from previously completed reviews, in order to identify systemic lessons which should be shared more widely."

The committee also complained of evidence that some Gateway verdicts have not been taken seriously, a problem reinforced by lack of transparency.

For example, Computing revealed in 2006 that the Rural Payments Agency pressed ahead with a troubled IT project despite receiving three “red lights” in its Gateway review.

"Unlike the US, where performance reports for public programmes are published on the internet, there is an unwillingness to reveal performance information," said the report.

The MPs demanded that the civil service develop a more open culture to enable others to learn from successes and how to avoid repeating failures, with peer reviews "welcomed as an opportunity for learning rather than a threat".

And the committee singled out a lack of available project management skills, appropriate governance arrangements and a skills shortage, with an over-reliance on contracted-in staff for problems with the National Programme for IT in the NHS and the Bowman military radio communication system.

"No one expects that every new project or initiative that government tries will work. Innovation brings with it the risk of failure,” said PAC chairman Edward Leigh.

"What we should expect, however, is that there is a well-informed understanding of that risk; effective and transparent monitoring of progress so that the plug can be pulled early on failing projects; and a fundamental commitment to learning from and acting on experience of past mistakes."

In June, the OGC and the Department of Health published 31 Gateway reviews relating to the £12.7bn NHS National Programme for IT, which revealed that many of the problems that have plagued the controversial project were identified at an early stage by reviews but were not sufficiently acted upon.