By silicon.com, 14 February 2006 16:45
Prime Minister-in-waiting, Gordon Brown, is the latest politician to join the IT crowd, praising biometrics in a major speech.
Brown has earned his shot at the top job through his solid management of the economy - something he did by cutting through nonsense and buzzwords to find the facts of a situation. So it seems out of character to throw his support behind such controversial technology.
While silicon.com is always a cheerleader for innovative use of technology, the government's relentless optimism that technology can solve every problem is slightly worrying.
The opposition parties are also beginning to realise this is a government that is over-reliant on technology at the expense of thought-out policies.
The Tories have begun to take pot shots at the government on tech-related issues as wide-ranging as DNA databases, chip and PIN and digital mapping, while the Lib Dems have been solid in their opposition to ID cards.
Increasingly, political parties are measured on which can deliver public services most cost-effectively.
And as technology is increasingly the route for service delivery and cost efficiencies, whichever administration gets to grip with public sector IT first could find themselves with a hefty chunk of cash to reinvest - or hand back in tax cuts.
Supporting new technologies is great - but politicians should be wary that they don't over-promise the benefits.
And if they push too hard on technology which isn't ready because they need to shore up their policies, they should not be allowed the luxury of blaming the IT people when things go wrong.
Comments
There are 4 comments. Join the discussion
1. anonymous
The UK is fast becoming one of the World's most oppressive regimes. Our Labour government is leading us into Stalinist state. Where did it all go wrong? It's just unbelievable. Perhaps if we didn't go round the World bombing the hell of countries like Iraq we might have a truly safer country. ID cards are being pushed to meet the needs of an increasingly authoritarian government; at best they are a scam to feed billions in tax to a greedy IT industry. If as Gordon Brown says 40 other countries are lining up for ID cards then God help this World.
2. Nick Cole
It isn't just government. Plenty of people have a naive understanding of what is involved with technology, thinking that it can solve everything.
Too often projects get overly complex and project sponsors are unwilling to reconsider the value or worth of what they are doing. Most projects instead of trying to replicate all possible variations within the business rules discard the ability of the infinitely mor eflexible human being. The best projects are either the ones that are simple to define within a narrow range of straightforward objectives, or those that complement human adaptability to accommodate the issues that were over the horizon or dismissed during the specification and design phase.
The desire to automate is not necessarily a good thing and not everything can or should be automated.
In government terms the biggest problem is that the 'big idea' generated for what started off as a well intentioned political proposal gets pushed through regardless. Invariably on the basis on the power enjoyed (or misused) by Ministers. Ideas that are generated on the basis of single issue politics often ill-informed do not always work in practice. And the problem is compounded when professional advice, often pointing out the flaws is dismissed in the drive to get the policy implmented.
3. anonymous
Quite right mr anon. we should hand out dynamite to anyone who can use it regardless of who they are.
Oh and how about outlawing computers and motor cars...
4. Haydn Rees
IT is a force multiplier. IT can be used to amplify any tendancy either to control restrict and demean, or liberate enable and dignify; a master or a servant. The IT Crowd know this, and usually build in IT as a servant unless explicitly told not to. With something as fundamental as e-government, the social ramifications, and the tidal variation of the kind of society we end up with are huge.
Because Blair is trained as a lawyer, not an executive, he and the large majority of British politician lack the imagination and leadership to see and grasp the radically transformative opportunity presented by IT. Government is welcome to the financial windfall; the cultural windfall is the battle worth fighting. Do we want a open transparent tolerant culture? Every decision visible? Every discussion scrutinised by the million pairs of eyes competent to judge it (a bit like open source software)? The first discussion is one of principals. Here's my two pence; databses never aggregated; data collected at public expense never used against the interest of the individual; the most tolerant and charitable interpretation is made of any data given online.
Gordon can come down to the basement and hang with the nerds, but he'll need an ethics bypass first or he'll never fit in.