Examination of witnesses (Questions 100
- 119)
MONDAY 15 JUNE 1998
MR ROBIN
MOUNTFIELD, CB,
MR MARK
GLADWYN, SIR
ALAN LANGLANDS
and MR FRANK
BURNS
100. It does. It does not sound good but
it sounds right. Any reason to think that is the end of it?
(Mr Mountfield) No, I do not think it would be
prudent to say that with the record of forecasting in the IT field
one could be absolutely confident it is not going to increase.
All I would say is that as we get deeper into this programme professionals
are looking in detail at the forward costs. In some cases they
are reducing them. In a few cases they are increasing them. The
overall effect, as you rightly point out, is that it is still
increasing. I would be frankly surprised if it did not go on increasing
a little bit.
101. If it did increase at the same rate
between now and the year 2000 there would be an extra £180
million on costs.
(Mr Mountfield) I think it is unlikely to be at
that rate, if only because the proportion of work still undone
is reducing all the time. We have already spent, we believe, at
least a quarter of the total.
102. Can I ask you a bit about defence.
We are told that defence is the area which is having difficulty.
In what sense is it having difficulty and in what way is it affected?
(Mr Mountfield) I do not think I meant to imply
that they were having general difficulty.
103. The NAO report refers to them having
difficulty.
(Mr Mountfield) The point I tried to make was
in the area of skilled resources, which is drawn attention to,
I think, in the NAO report, it has certainly been mentioned in
the Chancellor of the Duchy's statements, and the problem there
is not that they are finding it impossible to get the skilled
resources but they are having to divert them from other IT activities.
This is an example of where tackling the year 2000 problem is
leading to postponement of other activities.
104. That applies to Sir Alan Langlands
as well does it not?
(Mr Mountfield) To some extent.
105. Why single out the Ministry of Defence
as being particularly vulnerable?
(Mr Mountfield) Because the majority of departments
have said that they are not finding that skill shortage is a problem.
It may be that there are financial reasons why they are having
to divert from other matters into year 2000 work but in the Ministry
of Defence's case they say they are concerned about skill supply
shortage.
106. Defence now is very IT based, is it
not?
(Mr Mountfield) Indeed.
107. Is there any strategic or operational
risk as a result of this worry about skills?
(Mr Mountfield) I do not think I could competently
answer on that point. The general messages are reassuring on that
point but you would not expect me, I am sure, to answer on the
Ministry of Defence's detailed security consideration.
108. No, but I want to know about it.
(Mr Mountfield) Indeed.
109. Would you please put a written report
in[2]
because I think if there is anything wrong on the defence front
the Committee and perhaps the Defence Select Committee would want
to know about it.
(Mr Mountfield) Indeed.
110. We will alert our sister Committee
to that fact. Would you let us have an urgent note on that?
(Mr Mountfield) Yes, we will.
111. Thank you. Sir Alan, again may I congratulate
you on your elevation.
(Sir Alan Langlands) Thank you.
112. Your's has been a miserable job, we
well understand that.
(Sir Alan Langlands) Thank you very much.
113. This Committee has not done much to
make it much happier I realise.
(Sir Alan Langlands) I suspect I am about to see
the golden goal, Chairman.
114. I am in an amicable mood I promise
you. Tell me, our old friends RISP and HISP, Wessex Regional Information
System and your own national hospital information system which
cost £100 million to save three million pounds a year—great
investment—how are they affected by the millennium bug,
if at all?
(Sir Alan Langlands) They are affected in the
same way as all our major operating systems. We have talked a
lot tonight about medical equipment but, of course, we do have
other so-called patient administration systems as a class of systems
in the Health Service and these are affected. These changes and
the necessary checks and compliance checks on these systems have
been worked through with the manufacturers as it has in relation
to all our equipment.
115. On HISP it is not long ago we were
looking at that. It is a fairly recent project, is it not, the
national hospital information system This was at the frontiers
of application of information technology to your sector of Government
service. It was preparing us for the next century. Are you telling
us they overlooked the fact that the next century has a different
date?
(Sir Alan Langlands) No, I think it does go back
some time, Chairman. These systems have been developing right
through from the late 1980s, through the early 1990s and into
the mid 1990s.
116. What is your estimate of the cost of
those two particular projects which as a Committee we know a fair
amount about?
(Sir Alan Langlands) I cannot break down the costs
that I quoted by system. The breakdown I have here is in relation
to the different sorts of trusts.
117. That is not trusts, is it, you run
that?
(Sir Alan Langlands) No, no.
118. Who runs HISP?
(Sir Alan Langlands) The HISS system or further
developments of that system are run in individual trusts as part
of their normal activities.
119. It is a national integrated system?
Does that not bring it within your remit?
(Sir Alan Langlands) It is not a national integrated
system.
2 Note: See Evidence, Appendix 3, page 20 (PAC
360). Back
| 
