| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Straw: No. I am just at the end of my speech.
Mr. Richard Allan (Sheffield, Hallam): I should like to start my contribution by echoing the comments of the Home Secretary and the right hon. Member for Maidstone and The Weald (Miss Widdecombe) in praise of the staff at the Passport Agency. My constituency employees, in common with those of many other hon. Members, have found them extremely courteous when dealing with individual cases. My staff have made some firm friends in the Passport Agency, the Immigration and Nationality Directorate at Croydon and the Child Support Agency over the many happy hours that they have spent on the telephone together dealing with my constituents' business.
The Home Secretary worried all of us by suggesting that bad luck in the Home Office comes in fours. The right hon. Lady cited three instances, and we are left wondering what the fourth could be. Perhaps it is the Home Secretary's plan to place criminal record checks in the hands of the Passport Agency, to add to its work load. That decision was taken on the basis of its
Rev. Martin Smyth (Belfast, South):
I notice that the Liberal Democrat amendment has a specific reference to the IT problems. Have any lessons been learned from the computerisation in Lunar house? Are we satisfied that the consultancies involved have been up to the mark? Can we discover who they are?
Mr. Allan:
The hon. Gentleman raises an important point. There are two computer systems. The current
Indeed, there seems to be a conspiracy to fill up the country. The IND at Croydon is unable to give foreign nationals their passports back so that they can leave the country, and the Passport Agency is unable to give British nationals passports so that they can leave the country. Some important lessons could be learned about the management of IT contracts by government at both venues, and I hope that the Government will take them on board.
Mr. Maclean:
I am following carefully what the hon. Gentleman says. Has he seen the press release issued by the National Audit Office, which confirms his remarks? The NAO examined the Home Office computerisation programme, and one of its recommendations is:
Mr. Mark Todd (South Derbyshire):
I too was an IT professional before I entered the House. The experience on this and other projects is that basic disciplines, suchas risk analysis before entering a project, project management, clear accountability for running a project, and appropriate contingency planning seem to be missing in the public service.
Mr. Allan:
The hon. Gentleman has outlined a set of good remedial measures, and I hope that they are being noted for future computer projects.
I have been disappointed by the Government's response to the concerns that have been raised by the Passport Agency--until today, when the Home Secretary has at least come to the Dispatch Box with some form of apology. I was disappointed in their earlier responses, which seemed to shoot the messenger and blame the customer. The Government's view was that if they did not tell people about the problem, it would go away. Their ostrich-like approach has clearly been shown to have failed. Other hon. Members will have had constituents with problems similar to those that exist now, way before any publicity was given to the issue. The problem existed and was shown to be building up for many months. Delays to the average processing time increased month on month.
My hon. Friend the Member for Southport (Mr. Fearn) wrote to the Home Office as long ago as April this year, dragging the problem to its attention and seeking a remedy. However, little action was taken until June, when the first recruitment of extra staff took place.
Mr. Ronnie Fearn (Southport):
I actually wrote at the end of March and in early April, and perhaps that prompted the Home Secretary to take the initiative. At that time, people at the Liverpool office were desperate and asked me to do all that I could to get some improvement. We have heard that 300 members of staff were put in quite late. Why was there no action in March--when I and, probably, other hon. Members wrote--to put people into the Liverpool office?
Mr. Allan:
My hon. Friend is right. Early action would have saved the Passport Agency money and saved a large number of constituents huge distress.
In May, my right hon. Friend the Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith)--on behalf of the Liberal Democrats--acted as an early-warning system for the problems by tabling parliamentary questions, and by publicising the fact that there was a problem with the delays and that the average processing time had increased.
Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire):
Is the point that the hon. Gentleman is now making about his right hon. Friend the Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed referred to in the first line of the Liberal Democrat amendment, in which it claims that
Mr. Allan:
I admire the modesty of the hon. Gentleman. We are referring to work done by this party which was widely publicised in the national press. In the context of this debate, we felt that it was important to make sure that the House was aware of the work that had been done. I take nothing away from all hon. Members who have worked on this matter. I particularly give full credit to the right hon. Member for Maidstone and The Weald for her cruise missile strike against the Government today. In this debate, we join her in criticising the Government in the strongest possible terms, in an attempt to achieve some joined-up opposition.
The right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard)--who, I believe, is a good friend of the right hon. Lady--was a prophet, a Nostradamus of our time. In the UK Passport Agency framework document of May 1996, he stated in the foreword that the agency faced "a challenging period." Clearly, the right hon. Lady is in place now to make the challenges.
"proven track record of discreet delivery of a large application driven service"--[Official Report, 14 December 1998; Vol. 322, c. 356.]--
and in particular recognition of its
"experience of procuring information technology using public- private partnership arrangements which will be appropriate for the setting up of the CRB".--[Official Report, 16 June 1999; Vol. 333, c. 159.]
The Liberal Democrats feel that the proven track record of the agency's ability to set up a new IT system must be called into question in the context of the Criminal Records Bureau.
"Departments should consider whether a proposed project might be too ambitious to be attempted at one go."
Mr. Allan:
That is an interesting report by a worthy body. As a former IT professional, I take a close interest in these matters. With Government systems--many others have similar problems--hope triumphs over reality. Agencies and organisations try to meet over-ambitious efficiency targets, and they lay off staff ahead of a new computer system that is intended to make savings. A commercial company would not risk doing that. A large utility running a similar business would not take the risks that monopoly suppliers, such as the Passport Agency, have taken.
"the Liberal Democrats first exposed the problems at the Passport Agency at the end of May"?
Questions were being raised in this House from March onwards about the problems, some of which have been mentioned. For instance, I made a speech on the Floor of the House on 26 May--but I would never be immodest enough to table a motion that referred to the hon. Member for North-East Derbyshire first exposing the problem at the Passport Agency at the end of May.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |