By Andy McCue, 6 September 2007 00:01
NEWS
Poor planning and a lack of testing of IT systems have been blamed for "inept" delays in the payment of £1.5bn of vital EU subsidies to thousands of UK farmers.
The Rural Payments Agency is responsible for administering the Single Payment Scheme, introduced following a 2003 reform of the way EU Common Agricultural Policy subsidies are handed out.
The UK government developed a complex system for administering the scheme, which maps farmers' land to a database, and problems with it meant just 15 per cent of the £1.5bn subsidies available were paid out to farmers by the end of the 2005/06 financial year.
A report into the fiasco by Whitehall spending watchdog the Public Accounts Committee has found implementation of the project started before the final specification and regulations for the subsidy scheme were agreed by the European Commission.
silicon.com Public Sector
Get the latest public sector news straight to your inbox. Sign up for the PS newsletter today!
This meant the Rural Payments Agency (RPA) had to make 23 substantial changes to the computer system to take account of the final policy and regulatory revisions.
Testing on the IT systems also didn't fully simulate the real-world environment. That lead to problems later on as the agency underestimated the work involved in populating the database with the mapping data for farms in England and Wales.
The PAC report said: "Failure to test computer systems completely and adequately is a problem we have often seen with government IT projects. Time should be built in to test the IT systems as a whole as well as the individual components within it to obtain adequate assurance that components are fully compatible and deliver the required business process."
Work on the SPS implementation also carried on despite receiving three 'red' warnings from government procurement body the Office of Government Commerce in its gateway reviews.
The PAC report said: "Development work on the computer system nevertheless continued and no contingency plan was invoked, despite limited confidence that the system would be ready on time. If 'red' reviews are to be taken seriously, departments need to be explicit about the circumstances in which they would lead to fundamental review or termination of a project."
The latest cost of the project to implement the SPS is £122m - £46.5m more than estimated, with further increases likely for elements such as the software to extract management information from the system.
Edward Leigh, MP, chairman of the PAC, blamed the failures on bad decision-making, poor planning, incomplete testing of IT systems, confused lines of responsibility and a failure by the management team to face up to the unfolding crisis.
He said in the report: "The story of the inept handling of the scheme... should make a richly rewarding study for senior civil servants across the whole of government for some time to come."
The RPA met its target of 96 per cent of payments for the last financial year but said in its annual report that it does not expect the subsidy system to be fully stable until next year.
Comments
There are 4 comments. Join the discussion
1. Paul Gray
The real blame lies with Margaret Beckett.
Why did England and Scotland have differing systems?
2. Roger Huffadine
How about naming the moron responsible for the cock up? Oh! & if the government needs someone to deliver any other huge project on time, to budget, performing well and to quality then just look me up and send me an e-mail - I'm 60 this year so have enough experience to say NO to stupid people - which usually helps to get a quality system [aw shit you want someone under 30?]
3. Adam Ripley
When will so called IT professionals realise that the testing of IT systems must be done independently of the development and in context of the business and its requirements!!!
4. Richard
Oh dear! Aren't "databases" always the solution?
Over the last 10 years, government has repeated promoted "databases" as the magical instant solution to numerous (social) problems; everything from child development to crime and anti-terrorism;
Even now, they're spending vast sums on the highly intrusive Childrens Database, National DNA Database and cluster of ID databases.
The government, their advisors, their staff and their commercial contractors clearly lack the skills to specify, procure and operate these databases.
It's time to call a halt before even more public money is wasted; wasted without even solving the original (social) problems.