Government concern at management of Major Projects

[DaveNewcastle]

Its not just the Railways, the National Audit Office has just published this report into the Assurance systems in place to manage 'Major Projects' :
"The National Audit Office discusses the assurance for major government projects, such as the introduction of large IT systems, the construction of ships and helicopters and major changes to how services are delivered
. . .
There are 205 projects in the Government Major Project Portfolio, with a combined whole-life cost of £376 billion, and annual cost of £14.6 billion. Of those projects, 39 have a delivery confidence rating of 'red' or 'amber/red'.
. . .
The Authority is reporting on 160 more projects as part of its portfolio and completing more in-depth assurance work; but with 40% fewer staff than the body it replaced there’s an overdependence on key individuals.

The system is not built to last and processes need to be formalised across departments, with open reporting of project data to help create a more effective and enduring system."

From : Assurance for Major Projects: HM Treasury and Cabinet Office

I wouldn't want anyone on here to be carrying any false sense of confidence while we discuss our nations' major developments!

 

[tbtc]

I'm glad to see that this is being looked into.

The Government funds lots of well meaning things which end up not providing value for money because they were badly managed - the Cambridgeshire Busway and Edinburgh Trams being too examples that we know too much about - if the Government were as efficient in building these things as the private sector* were then we could save billions.

(* - please don't use Wembly Stadium as an example of Private Sector efficiency, because I really can't defend that...)

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Even in the very bad old days in Romania, did you ever see Nicolae Ceauescu feel the need to make such a statement ?..