|
8 September 2003
The history of IT in Government - Part Six
Government IT under New Labour: The Office of the e-Envoy, the Office of Government Commerce and eGovernment Success and Failure
By Joe Organ
Although the Conservative government got the eGovernment ball rolling, it is the Labour administration that has made the bulk of progress in harnessing new ICTs in the public sector. However, 50 years of failure in government IT is an ominous sign, and it will be necessary to shirk historical patterns to ensure future success with eGovernment.
Labour began in earnest by producing the Modernising Government white paper, which promised to create nothing short of a "corporate IT strategy for government", to "converge and inter-connect" public service IT systems, to encourage a"'co-ordinated approach" to procurement and to improve "partnership across the public sector and with the private sector" (1998/99, p46). Considering historical precedent, this would require a significant improvement in the ability of central government to co-ordinate departments, agencies and IT suppliers towards this corporate approach, and a key aspect of the reform programme has been the creation of the Office of the e-Envoy (OeE), which absorbed the CITU, and the Office of Government Commerce (OGC), into which the CCTA was subsumed.
The OeE has three broad policy objectives; To induce a fertile environment for e-commerce in Britain, to make the Internet available to anyone who wants access to it, and finally to achieve the 100 per cent electronic service delivery target by 2005. Thus the work of the OeE is vast in scope, and can include industrial relations, market development and analysis, democracy and participation, technical standards policy, promotional campaigning, training and education, strategic direction and so on. The OeE symbolises an ambitious move to locate joined-up electronic reform of public services in a general shift in British life, but considering the difficulty experienced by past co-ordinating bodies, and the ambition involved in the task at hand, the OeE is in danger of offering little more than a cosmetic front.
| Although progress has been made behind the scenes, publicly, the OeE say little about the enormous difficulties in creating the changes necessary for joined-up eGovernment. |
Reports from the Office seem to concentrate on developing a positive 'vibe' around eGovernment rather than engaging in the complexities of the reform programme, which the personnel at the OeE understand all too well and grapple with daily. Annual reports indicate a distinct unwillingness to acknowledge the mistakes and problems in eGovernment projects, which the National Audit Office (NAO) have been scrutinising (1999; 2002a; 2002b; 2002c; 2002d). Although progress has been made behind the scenes, publicly, the OeE say little about the enormous difficulties in creating the organisational, structural, cultural and technical changes necessary for joined-up eGovernment. This paucity led the Trade and Industry Select Committee in 2001 to accuse the Office of the e-Envoy of being "self-congratulatory" and to call for more "independent commentary", as there was a "whiff of unreality about the eGovernment agenda (2001,pvi/xiii). Furthermore, the NAO revealed that many members of the OeE believed the Office would cease to exist once its initial targets had been reached (2002c,p45).
Recent reports indicate that the OeE, after its downscaling earlier this year and the intended departure of the e-Envoy Andrew Pinder next April, is destined for the same fate as other central policy organisations across the history of government IT. The OeE has produced some important work in technical standards of interoperability, authenticity, security, website design and other areas, it runs the successful UKOnline.gov.uk government web portal and the innovative Government Gateway project. However, the ostensible emphasis appears to be on promotional and marketing exercises, which is perhaps not surprising considering the enormous scope of its work. The indications are that, although the Office of the e-Envoy is well known in departments, as are the targets it has set, government bodies are unlikely to use the Office in the comprehensive way envisaged in its remit.
Although the OeE talks of breaking down barriers, forging new links, sharing data, offering new types of responsive services and all the other elements that make up the joined-up package, it is difficult to see that independent departments and agencies will give enough attention to the OeE's vision for eGovernment projects to fully embody the joined-up ethos.
The other, recently-established central eGovernment body is the Office of Government Commerce, created within the Treasury in April 2000. Unlike the OeE, the OGC is much less about promoting a positive image of eGovernment, and it co-ordinates IT in a variety of ways, including improving the relationship between departments and suppliers, using IT to improve the efficiency of procurement processes, making departments more intelligent customers, and overseeing, advising and testing the management of eGovernment projects. Considering the history of IT project failure in government, the success of the OGC improving relations with the private sector and curbing eGvernment project disasters seems to be substantially more urgently required than some of the OeE's endeavours. The OGC offer project management methodology and, through its Gateway Reviews, it provides rigorous testing of IT projects, with an objective to root out likely failures. Although the OGC has unfortunately not been given the power to veto weak eGovernment projects, its work in this area appears imperative if the eGovernment agenda is to mature.
| Both the OeE and the OGC have been important for eGovernment, but it will be interesting to see if they survive beyond 2004 |
Both the OeE and the OGC have been important for eGovernment, but it will be interesting to see if they will survive beyond 2004; both have experienced difficulties in imposing central policy on departments who prefer to operate in isolation. Pressure has mounted because, as with the previous history of government IT, large projects in the eGovernment era have often encountered serious problems. For instance projects in the Inland Revenue, Criminal Records Bureau, HMCE, Department for Education and Skills, the Public Records Office, the Criminal Justice System, and the Office of the e-Envoy itself have all run into problems, whilst sharing data between IT systems involved in health, social care and crime has proved difficult. Despite some successes, many e-government projects have either run over budget or have not yet provided the improvements in service envisaged.
Thus, in conclusion, there has not, as of yet, been a total break from the 50-year history of government IT, although many departments have made significant progress. Central bodies are still struggling to implement policies in departments, whilst many projects have run into difficulties.
For eGovernment to be a true success, central government must learn from the historical precedent and ensure that co-ordination is well resourced and powerful, that private sector expertise is harnessed and that departments act corporately rather than in the traditional silos; easier said than done. Throughout this long period, progress with government IT has been slow, difficult and uneven, and eGovernment needs to evolve in a measured and calculated fashion for the ethos of joining up to take root. The 2005 deadline, therefore, may do more harm than good.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
| | · | Cabinet Office (1998/99) Modernising Government - cm 4310, London:HMSO |
| | · | NAO (1999/2000) Government on the Web - HC 87, London:HMSO |
| | · | NAO (2001/02a) Better Public Services Through e-government - HC 704-I, London:HMSO |
| | · | NAO (2001/02b) e-Revenue - HC 492, London:HMSO |
| | · | NAO (2001/02c) Government on the Web I - HC 764, London:HMSO |
| | · | NAO (2001/02d) Helen Margetts and Patrick Dunleavy's supporting academic article for Better Public Services Through e-government - HC 704-III, London:HMSO |
| | · | House of Commons Trade and Industry Committee (2000/01) UK Online Reviewed: The first annual report of the E-minister and E-Envoy - HC 66, London:HMSO |
ARTICLES IN THIS SERIES
|
