IT project spend ‘was in the blue book all the time’

By Simon Tostevin

Social Security minister Diane Lewis says that the States was kept apprised of progress and spending on its computer project.

SOCIAL SECURITY insists it did keep the States informed of its move to a PC-server based system.

Minister Diane Lewis was surprised to hear that Treasury and Resources had claimed it was not aware of the costs of the project and how it was progressing. She said the department had been informing the States of progress in the annual accounts [blue book] along with a narrative on how the transfer had fared in the preceding 12 months.

In a letter responding to the Public Accounts Committee’s report into Social Security’s implementation of a new computer system, Treasury minister Lyndon Trott said Social Security should have informed the States of any difficulties and the escalating costs.

But Deputy Lewis said that was simply not fair.

‘I don’t think his comments are justified. They were included in the annual accounts and there were costs included.

‘I would have thought the members of Treasury and Resources should have been looking at them very closely.’

She added that the reason Social Security had not approached Treasury since 2004 for any assistance or advice in relation to the project was because it had been progressing well from that point ahead of going live in September 2006.

But Deputy Trott argued that no one could determine from the figures included in the yearly accounts whether there was an issue with the project.

‘This project has gone £3m. over and they have not informed the States. To say that the blue book is notification is nonsense.

‘We agree with PWC and PAC that this project should have come to the States.’

Deputy Lewis remains adamant that the total cost of the project was £6.375m. and not the £9.232m. claimed in the PWC report.

‘The figure which appears in the Social Security Department’s financial accounts for 2006 is £6.375m. These are the capitalised costs which were audited on a true and fair basis by the then States auditors, KPMG.

‘The difference between the two figures results from PWC including the costs of feasibility studies and pilot programmes, licence fees, other software and hardware costs and professional fees.

‘Some of these additional costs have been accounted for within the annual revenue accounts of the department and others have been capitalised in the accounts under the general computer costs heading.’