Examination of witnesses (Questions 380
- 396)
WEDNESDAY 29 JULY 1998
DAME ANN
BOWTELL DCB, MR
STUART LORD
AND MR
GEORGE MCCORKELL
380. So it is not cash up-front?
(Dame Ann Bowtell) No ***
Mr Wicks
381. There seem to be two problems. One is that
the thing is not working or not as well as people thought, it
is going to take longer, it is going to be more expensive, which
is the usual story, is it not, about computers, as far as I can
tell?
(Dame Ann Bowtell) This is quite an extreme version
of it.
382. Okay, but the other thing is that it seems
that you have changed your mind about the usefulness of the product.
You mentioned that Sainsbury's are now doing this and others.
Did we not really know that at the time, that there were going
to be these developments with more people going to Sainsbury's
for all these things? It was not that long ago.
(Dame Ann Bowtell) This was 1993 when we first signed
up to it. It has been clear that ACT has been the cheapest solution
for us and always has been. It is just that the more that other
sorts of facilities become available, the less attractive this
sort of payment card looks. Even so, had this been running ahead
and if there had not been a question of more money and all the
rest of it, I do not think we would be hesitating. It is just
that it can only go ahead at the price of a much longer contract
and much more money and then it really does not look as attractive.
That is our problem.
(Mr Lord) That is the question being addressed. We
are asking these questions because of delay. *** Given that we
are taking stock, we are taking stock in the environment of 1998,
not that of 1993. We are already that much nearer the end of the
contractual period and the aspiration of the Benefits Agency would
have been to go towards ACT at the end of that period, but for
how long might people have these cards if we carry on without
having the extension, so it is the delay that prompts the questions
about whether it now makes sense.
383. Was it only ICL that bid for this?
(Dame Ann Bowtell) No.
(Mr McCorkell) There were two other consortia that
bid for this, one of which was led by IBM, and I am trying to
think who the other one was. We can let you know.
384. Presumably you awarded it to ICL partly
because you liked what they were saying about the timescale and
costs?
(Dame Ann Bowtell) Absolutely.
(Mr McCorkell) It was indeed awarded on the combination
of the two things.
(Dame Ann Bowtell) If there were to be a question
giving the sorts of extensions that ICL have asked for, I think
there would be a real question about whether that was do-able
within the terms of the contract. You can vary the terms a bit,
but there are limits.
385. Is the contract a secret document?
(Mr McCorkell) The contract is commercially confidential.
(Dame Ann Bowtell) It is also probably about that
big (indicating).
386. The thing is stacked against the taxpayer,
is it not, when it is a secret document and no one can see it
and they give predictions about the timescale and costs which
turn out to be twaddle? I am just wondering how on earth we stand
any chance of safeguarding the taxpayer's interest.
(Dame Ann Bowtell) Well, all of these big computer
projects are very complex, difficult things to cost when you start
off. They should not go as wrong as this one has gone.
Chairman
387. But it is particularly inappropriate or
inapposite at this stage for ICL to contemplate going to the market
and this is a flagship project for them.
(Dame Ann Bowtell) Well, this is why it is all so
difficult for them ***
Ms Stuart
388. As I understand it, and you will correct
me if I am wrong, it is not just simply that you would push your
card in and you get your entitlement to money out, but if we were
to go via the post office, you would have a screen which gives
the entitlement to benefits. All of us at some stage, it is not
just a rural issue, but it is also the urban representatives who
have this struggle in keeping the post offices open and it is
a real debate, and I think what would be quite useful is if you
could let us know what would be your assessment of the training
needs for the Post Office to actually administer the system in
that way rather than just going for the automatic cash transfer
because it would help us with an informed debate. If we have the
Post Office coming to us, as MPs, and saying, "If only you
can convince the DSS to continue with that, the member of staff
sits behind the machine, calls it up on the screen, it has got
all the entitlements, he knows Mrs Bloggs, they know the environment,
this really is the best way to deliver", then it is a very
seductive argument.
(Dame Ann Bowtell) And I think if it was here today,
which it almost ought to have been on the original timetable,
the system would be fine. The actual training needs, according
to ICL, are a day's training for those 70,000 staff, so it is
that there are 70,000 of them which is difficult. The problem
is not with the system now that we, I think, believe that it is
technically suitable, but it is with the length of time it is
taking and the extra money that ICL want and it is then a value
for money question, but it is very difficult.
Ms Stuart: I think it would be useful to have
that, with this debate, in our own minds.
Chairman
389. I do not know if there are people who could
produce that.
(Dame Ann Bowtell) I am not sure exactly what it is
you want.
390. The point that Gisela makes is a powerful
one from our perception as ordinary Members of Parliament. There
will be a huge public argument and a lobby in support of the Post
Office.
(Dame Ann Bowtell) Absolutely.
391. And you have made the absolutely crucially
important point that there are training requirements that they
may be under-estimating, so if there was some way of being able
to put that question back to the Post Office, it may put the debate
in a slightly more meaningful perspective.
(Dame Ann Bowtell) Well, I doubt that we can challenge
what they say and if they say it is a day, I accept it is a day.
I just think that training 70,000 people is a pretty big demand,
but in a sense that is not the crucial issue.
Mr Flight
392. If I have understood you correctly, your
assessment, if a decision is taken to cancel and after all the
rowing, is that it probably will not have cost the taxpayer anything
because you have got a good case for cancelling and it is going
to cost ICL who will have to write off all their costs. Is that
the commercial bottom line?
(Dame Ann Bowtell) I think that whichever way you
turn, there is going to be a cost because if we cancel ***
393. ***
(Dame Ann Bowtell) ***
Chairman
394. We could go on for the rest of the week
on this.
(Dame Ann Bowtell) ***
395. Fine, but, believe me, we are not looking
to put you into any kind of difficulty at all and we will arrange
a satisfactory accommodation of that question, I am sure. One
of the things we should take forward is perhaps if you were able
to give us some private, off-the-record briefing of your own as
these things develop, then this does not land us in the sort difficulty
we are facing at the moment.
(Dame Ann Bowtell) I would be very happy to do that.
396. I do assure you that we are a mature Committee
and you can trust us and that we are willing and anxious to help,
subject to the rules that Select Committees operate under, so
if you bear that in mind and there are appropriate moments when
you think you could have us to share some of these things with
us, that would be enormously helpful.
(Dame Ann Bowtell) We will do that. We would be very
happy to do that.
Chairman: Well, I know you have spent an enormous
amount of time, as one has to, doing the work in preparation for
this morning, but we are really very grateful and thank you very
much.
|
