NHS chaos exposed by new e-mails

[empip]

How come this is 'news !!!' .. more like history !
More dosh pouring from the fissures in New Labour monopoly..

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1869851,00.html

 

[kendor]

From what i see the government is just trying to make the NHS run more efficiently with computerisation, it's not the government that set how much it will cost but the consultancies and the actual hardware suppliers etc, and it's them that need to get their act together to supply the service that they have been employed to, so to again try blaming labour for the problems is i think a bit off.

It's always the easier option to blame labour all the time!

 

[empip]

But .. the buck stops with the Govn in a socially funded system !!
Surely you have to know precisely what you want .. ?
Tails, dogs, wagging and responsibility comes to mind.

 

[kendor]

But .. the buck stops with the Govn in a socially funded system !!
Surely you have to know precisely what you want .. ?
Tails, dogs, wagging and responsibility comes to mind.

i have to disagree, the government can't be held responsible for technical teething problems if the work has been outsourced, you may have an argument if it was all done in house ie governmental IT departments running the whole project.

 

[WoodYouLike]

The 10 private sector treatment centres, set up by the government to reduce waiting lists, are also absent from the official list on the computer.

Edwards warns that the treatment centres and foundation trusts will not be on the “choice menu” until next summer.

Ehhh? Sorry, but that sounds a bit 'nobody in this project knows how the thingy works? to me.
I'm not a specialist in database building, but this is ridiculus! There is a choice menu, 32 trusts hospitals and 10 private sector treatment centres has to be added to this list, how hard can that be? Does that really has to take 8 - 9 months. (Who does the datatyping over there? Even chimps will be quicker)
It only takes me 5 seconds to add a new product to my own database.

 

[Freddie]

But .. the buck stops with the Govn in a socially funded system !!
Surely you have to know precisely what you want .. ?
Tails, dogs, wagging and responsibility comes to mind.

i have to disagree, the government can't be held responsible for technical teething problems if the work has been outsourced, you may have an argument if it was all done in house ie governmental IT departments running the whole project.

Kendor thats incorrect whoever is in goverment they are at the top and if they employ people who cant do the job or who have got the wrong companies to do work for them then they are responsible for all.

 

[petewood]

Kendor thats incorrect whoever is in goverment they are at the top and if they employ people who cant do the job or who have got the wrong companies to do work for them then they are responsible for all.

But isn't that the same as saying that if you employ a builder and he makes a mess of your house it's your fault for employing the wrong builder?

 

[Freddie]

Kendor thats incorrect whoever is in goverment they are at the top and if they employ people who cant do the job or who have got the wrong companies to do work for them then they are responsible for all.

But isn't that the same as saying that if you employ a builder and he makes a mess of your house it's your fault for employing the wrong builder?

Petewood that really is a silly comparison, so on that basis the director or owner of a company isnt responsible for his managers or employers or anybody they have hired?

 

[oilman]

................... the director or owner of a company isnt responsible for his managers or employers or anybody they have hired?

This was demonstrated by the findings of the recent court case following the Hatfield rail crash.

 

[Freddie]

................... the director or owner of a company isnt responsible for his managers or employers or anybody they have hired?

This was demonstrated by the findings of the recent court case following the Hatfield rail crash.

Of course Oilman the buck stops at the top so they say or should do.

When the caught the Nazi's they hung the leaders

 

[Freddie]

Kendor thats incorrect whoever is in goverment they are at the top and if they employ people who cant do the job or who have got the wrong companies to do work for them then they are responsible for all.

But isn't that the same as saying that if you employ a builder and he makes a mess of your house it's your fault for employing the wrong builder?

By the way technically it is although you may be able to sue him for not doing the job correctly at the end of the day you employed him

 

[dg123]

I don't know what application is being used here but it can be immensely difficult to enhance a database - especially if the original design proves inadequate later on in the development. Many problems with this type of government contract is that the hirers will not award the contract to one supplier and the suppliers (certainly in IT) do not want to share their technology secrets, methodologies, etc.

Another problem is the government agency the work is being done for. The people there see any new system as a threat to their area of 'power' and are reticent when asked to supply data and working practises required to make the system work - I have had first hand experience of this.

Financial penalties can be built in to contracts which focus the suppliers on delivering a sound product but the definitions contained within service level agreements can be very woolly. There is also the very real issue that the product has been been built to specification and functions as specified by the client but, in fact, will not do the job.

 

[petewood]

Kendor thats incorrect whoever is in goverment they are at the top and if they employ people who cant do the job or who have got the wrong companies to do work for them then they are responsible for all.

But isn't that the same as saying that if you employ a builder and he makes a mess of your house it's your fault for employing the wrong builder?

By the way technically it is although you may be able to sue him for not doing the job correctly at the end of the day you employed him

You can't have it both ways Freddie, either it's your fault that the builder wrecked your house in which case you can't sue him or it's the builders fault in which case you can sue him.

I think you are mistaking the government using government employees to do a job as opposed to the govt contracting out to another company. Very different scenarios.

 

[Freddie]

Petewood whoever you or me pick to do our house is down to us, if we pick a right bozo then it's our fault.

If the builder doesnt do the job properly then we may be able to sue him but.....................

 

[joe-90]

How can anyone spend £6.2 billion on a computer?

Ebay, airlines, banks etc all run sophisticated websites - but £6.2 billion?

joe