Questions remain over the future of Airwave

Computing's investigation into the Airwave network has spoken to dozens of insiders and emergency services staff who have raised a number of crucial questions.

Here we consider a few of them.

Is resilience an issue?

According to Computing's sources, resilience in the Airwave system has been the cause of considerable anger among emergency personnel. They have raised their concerns in meetings with Airwave and the Police IT Organisation (Pito), a point admitted by supplier O2, who confirmed that discussions have taken place on the issue.

'I would not describe it as a row,' said an O2 spokeswoman. 'We would like to say that we are not happy with the situation.'

The concerns of the emergency services were brought to a head by a fire in a BT communications tunnel in Manchester in March which affected police communications systems.

The seriousness of the incident is in dispute. There are those who believe it was a major problem and Greater Manchester Police acknowledges that some officers had to switch to the old analogue system and mobile phones.

O2 insists that it was a minor incident that in some ways shows how robust the service is. It was the first service to return to use, said a spokeswoman.

The question is whether the resilience is adequate for a service on which all of our emergency services will come to depend.

It's a question that isn't going away, as O2 acknowledges.

'Airwave is in the process of developing enhanced resilience for a changing world and also to support the specified individual requirements of Fire and Ambulance in the national bids,' said a spokeswoman for O2.

Who will pay for such 'enhancements' is now a growing issue.

Do we need further investment and who will pay?

O2's acknowledgement of a 'changing world' touches the heart of the matter. It insists that it is meeting the requirements demanded in its contract.

'We are delivering the coverage, capacity and all the features and facilities across England, Wales and Scotland,' Jeff Parris, vice president of mmo2 Airwave told Computing last week.

But the needs of 1996, when the announcement of the service was made, and those of 2004 are very different.

The most obvious change is the threat of terrorism.

But another factor for all organisations is the growing demand for data services. Computing has reported that insiders have doubts about the ability to deliver a 100 per cent reliable data service, linking to new databases.

O2 says it is delivering 'as per the contract' and can offer impressive speeds. But will that scale to three emergency services nationwide 24x7?

Many believe that can only happen with significant extra investment.

Who will pay?

Some in the emergency services feel they are paying too much for the services they are being offered and think they are now at the mercy of O2 for any additional services they require including emergency backup.

One senior figure in the NHS approached by Computing felt that emergency backup should part of the core service offered, and not be an additional service.

Most believe there needs to be a review of needs and costs.

Who is being blamed for these perceived problems?

Some insiders believe Airwave isn't delivering the data service they expected, but most believe the problems go much deeper than just technology.

At the recent Association of Chief Police Officers conference in Birmingham, behind-the-scenes criticism was being levelled at Pito for failures in procurement.

Some emergency services staff told Computing that O2 is simply operating as a business and providing services for profit.

It cannot and should not define core services.

The government also comes in for criticism for taking a clear enough lead, particularly over the integration of fire and ambulance services into the contract.

Is this an issue that should be in the public domain?

Reports about Airwave clearly are very sensitive.

O2 sent Computing a statement pointing out that 'Al-Qaeda have stated that they obtain 80 per cent of their intelligence from public information.'

Our investigation has brought to light disturbing details regarding the initial procurement of the system which are being expressed by sources across the emergency services.

Computing has been given information that is potentially sensitive and we are drawing up a dossier to send to the Home Secretary.

'We are aware that some of the information could be sensitive and we have a duty to act responsibly,' said Computing editor Michael Gubbins

'We will send some of those concerns to the Home Office for consideration, while protecting our sources.'