No Wonder our UK 'National Health Service' is financially out of order. . .

[Phil Perry]

After I read earlier this week that the NHS were charged £1,500 for a pot of 'Moisturiser' I made some enquiries, and came up with this. . . . the NHS ( Read 'International Health Service, since anyone can front up from anywhere in the world and get treatment for nothing and never get chased for payment. . ) It would not be a cynical distortion to add that this is just the tip of a very large iceberg by the way. . . . .

 

[ATTACH]49209._xfImport[/ATTACH]

 

Not surprising that this monolith is a money sponge, completely run by numpty Public Service managers who have no idea how to negotiate sensible supplier prices. . . .and really don't give a crap, as they get paid and Gold Plated index linked pensioned whatever they do. . . .And,. .. oddly enough,. . . if found to be lacking in performance, they simply get Promoted, and moved on to another Health Authority to do it all over again. . . .

 

[Yenn]

Sounds similar to Australia.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

I recall doing a civil/public service job where they wanted to replace the systems and they wanted to ensure only the big (and therefore very expensive) consultancies bid for the tender. So they decided they would insert a clause in the RFT to say a minimum of 2m public liability and professional indemnity was required. I was a contractor at the time and said, "great! I can bid for it" and produced my insurance certificates of 5m coverage each. They were dumbfounded and asked what would be a rasonable number. I suggested they look at what they think the value of the contract would be and add 50% to cover any legal fees. The requirement shot up to 30m.

 

Another department had all of the major consultancies working on a big rework of some of their support/shared services. The company I was working for was selected as the software supplier (we actually were a small managemnt consultancy that provided software to support the business we worked in - we didn't have to sell the software - the point is we knew this business pertty well and the consultancies were OK in a general sense but not experts in the business sense. Well, at its peak, it was costing this department around 1.5m/day, but was estimated to average out at aroun 800k/day and go for, I think abour 5 years. In our contract, it was forbidden for us to talk to the end client without the express authorisation of the design lead consutlancy and only about the subject and within the remit of that design authority.

 

Everything that the consultancies were coming up with was, to put it politely, nuts. The challenge was complicated, but any innovative thinking by our company - arguably at the time one iof the leading experts in the field - was dismissed and they concocted convoluted solutions that would take eons to build and cost the client dearly. Of course, that is what the consultancies wanted and the department seemed to be totally blind to it (despiet some off the record conversations we would have at social occasions - and it did involve airfields - so as I could fly to the client, we used to talk a bit off the record). I realised what the problem was. Does anyone remember the old adage, "No one got fired for buying IBM (mainframes)". Going with us was a relative risk as we were well known in our niche, but not to those embarking on it for the first time. The problem - no accountability in the civil/public service. No one loses their jobs for performance - I think breach of security and breach of discipline may lead to a relatively easy dismissal, but it's too hard to dismiss for lack of performance - so just promote them up. And when the project was canned (because government auditors cottoned on), many of the senior civil/public servants on the project magically had a job at one of the consultancies.

 

For what its worth, I breached the condition of not speaking to the end client without authorisation twice - once where we were invited as observers to discuss a particularly complex issue the business was trying to solve. The consultancy went through it with them and then went through the possible options - all of which were unworkable. They concluded that it was a business problem and the software isn't about solving business problems - the business has to solve business problems (I virutally quote that). My program director motioned me to keep quiet - but I thought stuff it. "Er, that is not quite correct if I may. Our sotware handles W, X and Y out of the box; We can probably do Z with a few changes to..." Well, my program director's eyes rolled and I could see him working out a strategy to defuse yet another terse conversation with the design lead. The end client thanked my and asked if it is viable - and if not - why not?

 

The second time was where we were designing some messaging protocol for distributed business units that ran under relatively slow communications lines that had a small window of operting each day. Design lead decided a proticl with long winded metadata (that basucally increased the message size x6) was called for as the industry standards were going that way. I coughed to give them some indication that they were BS-ing, but they pressed on. Even my prgram director nodded to let me rip. I excused my interruption to the conversation and pointed out that on the estimated message volumes, they would have to keep the lines open around 4 times as long as they would need if they simply sent the data without all the miumbo jumbo - since it was our systems sending it and our systems receiving it, there wasn't a need for all this self-definition of the data. Thankfully the client brought a technical architect to that meeting and he thanked my for not making the client tell the suppliers the best way to supply their systems.

 

Not too long after, the cancelled the project - It probably had cost in the vicinity of 100m by this time.

 

@Phil Perry - remember the cost of the failed medical records project for the NHS - was it not £5bn? Mr Perot thanks Mr. Blair very much...

 

 

[Phil Perry]

@Phil Perry - remember the cost of the failed medical records project for the NHS - was it not £5bn? Mr Perot thanks Mr. Blair very much...

 

I used to fly regularly with the elder Brother of a civil servant who had regular dealings with Anthony Blair. . . .he said of Blair, that, Whenever 'Tony the regular guy' was told that something could not be done,. . all he did was wave his arm in a dismissive manner and say "LOOK. . . You are the EXPERTS,. . .YOU CAN MAKE IT WORK" . . . Brian told me that his Brother lost his rag one day and replied tersely to the PM, "Sure,. . we can make that work Prime Minister,. . ..but it will cost four times the budget that you have envisaged Sir, and take a heck of a lot longer to produce. . .".for this Outrageous expression of the truth, Bran's Brother was demoted to some junior crap position in another Ministry, as, even then, a PM couldn't sack a senior civil servant. . . .Peter Mandelslime ( read Rasputin the evil mad monk. . .utter fecking looney. . . ) pulled him to one side in some corridor a day later, and, flecked him with spittle when he hissed at him that him that he was finished in the civil service and he should get someone to check his car every morning before turning the key. . . . NOW,. . . . .This is anecdotal,. . .but having read lots about the Blair years,. . .it does not sound that unbelievable. . . .

 

From what I have heard from the same source ( yes, he didn't get blown up in his car ! ) about the HS2 Project, which nobody with half a working brain cell actually wants, as it is another very large and already over budget white elephant . . .Loads of Lords and other Government hangers on stand to make a financial killing on this railway jobbie, which will, so they say, save 20 minutes on a rail trip between Londonistan ad Birmingham,. .. ( It doesn't even have a station in Birmingham. . .too much expensive real estate to bulldoze out of the way, which would include estates owned by the great and the good. . . ) Will be another massive burden on the British taxpayer, if it ever gets off the ground,. . .along with the Chinese funded Nuclear facility using technology which is still unproiven all over Europe. . . yet they are pushing it hard. . . .more cash for vested interests. . .to be honest,. I'm buying shares oin piano wire, wo that there will be enough of it to stringe these bastards up from lamp posts all along the Thames. . . .

 

You appear t be plugged in to better sources than I Sir. . . .I'd like to hear your thoughts on the above. . . .

 

Annoyed, of Cannock. . . .

 

 

[Marty_d]

that had a small window of perting each day.

Is that like "twerking"?

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

I intentionally didn't give a currency nor state which department of which country I was referring to.. It could be the UK, Autralia or the US. However, suffice to say, they are all about the same, albeit with different methods. And that was a long time ago, too. Think September 11 and prior. Not plugged in any more. Teh NHS thing was splattered all over the news, so no more plugged in that you about that.

 

However, although I never had anythign to do with Blair, I did have the occasion to rub shoulders with one of his Australian counterpartsand I can say I would not be surprised if the story is true.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Is that like "twerking"?

Not quite... unless electrons jiggling about is your thing?????? ;-)

 

 

[old man emu]

I think that the problem with the marketing of IT solutions is that the people who have been convinced that they want IT solutions (High Level Management) don't have a clue about IT. At best, they can send an email, and maybe add an attachment to it, or open and close simple files. But they haven't a clue about what goes on in the background.

 

So they approach IT consultancies and want to talk to the head honcho. Unfortunately, these head honchos are often 5 - 10 years out of currency with what their technicians are working with, and how solutions can be reached. The customers have been convinced that IT is extremely expensive, so it's easy for the owner of the consultancy to inflate project costs and back the increases with flimflam. The owner of the consultancy is happy because of the income received. The High Level Management is happy because their people have got somewhat what they have been baying for. The only losers are the technicians who have to keep installing dated technology when they know they could get a better result using up-to-date technology.

 

It's a bit like finding a writing implement to use in Space. The Yanks went down the complicated ball-point pen route while the Russians chewed the end of a pencil.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Agree with all the above posts...

 

I recall another prime contractor that not only completely stuffed an implementation, but lied to the government owned corporation (that in itself is an oxymoron) saying it was on target until the last month of a 24 month project, where they finally admitted it would run late and had known for at least 12 months. The reaction from the corporation was that they were going to sue and the consultancy said they wold counter. The result, the corporation backed down and closed the project (and then came straight to us, and we delivered in 8 months). I was at a dinner with the managing consultant who was boasting what a success the project was. I knew the answer, but asked why, given it was cancelled and never got anywhere near live, he considered it successful. The answer was it was profitable for them as expected.. but it even surprised me.. 70% margin, no risk as the corporation was paying them monthly progress payments on nothing more than someone updating a gantt chart to say how much % complete they were.

 

Government - not their money; can't easily lose their jobs, can't claw things back... Why would you bother being diligent?

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

...It's a bit like finding a writing implement to use in Space. The Yanks went down the complicated ball-point pen route while the Russians chewed the end of a pencil.

I believe the Russians then had problems with all that graphite dust (a conductor) floating around their spacecraft and getting into electronics.

 

 

[octave]

Fact or Fiction?: NASA Spent Millions to Develop a Pen that Would Write in Space, whereas the Soviet Cosmonauts Used a Pencil

[Phil Perry]

Is that like "twerking"?

Naw mate,. . .that should have read O'perting. . . that's Irish twerking I think. . . .

 

 

[Bruce]

Is there any jurisdiction in the world which treats taxpayer's money with respect?

 

Locally, we have a fat council CEO who gets $1000 a day for shuffling papers and sucking up to the fat mayor.

 

You would think the ratepayers would be angry... 365 people have to pay $1000 rates a year just for this d#head.

 

But they seem resigned. Why am I the only angry one?

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

@Bruce - look around you.. How many of these constituents are in debt up to their eyeballs and focussing at keeping the wolves from the door while giving their kids and themselves every conceivable material possession and taxying their kids around from dawn to dusk on the weekends in the vain attempt to keep everyone happy. Too many people are probably angry but don't have time to vent and engage with democracy because they are too busy keeping their heads above water. And that is the way the pollies like it. Same in the UK, where 0% credit is prevalent fro everything from the weekend away to Paris for a few hundre pounds to many cars.