Former Ministers Need To Apologise For Fire Control Fiasco
Kate Hoey demands that former Fire Ministers apologise for their disastrous regionalised fire and rescue control rooms.
22 Sep 2011, 10:00
Is Bob Neill doing a good job?
This shambles could so easily have been avoided.
For years, as a member of the All-Party FBU group, I along with other MPs tried to get successive Fire Ministers to work with local fire and rescue staff and listen to their concerns. Instead there was a determination to press ahead without listening to any criticism, no matter how constructive. As the Committee’s report states, “rather than engaging with the Services to persuade them of the project’s merits, the Department excluded them from decisions about the design of the regional control centres and the proposed IT solution, even though these decisions would leave local services with potential long-term costs and residual liabilities to which they had not agreed.” This morning on the Today programme John Prescott tried to deflect all blame to the Civil Servants saying that Ministers cannot possibly know the intricate details of every proposal. Well John, I don’t expect Ministers to know how many paper clips are ordered by a Department but on a project on the grand scale of the fire and rescue control rooms, then I do expect Ministers to fully understand in full the detail. Not only that but I expect them to listen to those in Parliament who take a specific interest in the subject concerned. As John McDonnell, my predecessor as Chair of the Fire Brigade group in Parliament has said “we met Minister after Minister to expose the disastrous waste of resources being poured into this project. Each one refused to drop the scheme.” The Fire Brigade Union’s expertise was totally ignored and this from a Government supposedly sympathetic to Trade Unions. Ironically it was the Conservative Minister Bob Neil who first listened and began the process of ending the scandal.
There were of course sensible motivations behind the original idea to try to better co-ordinate the national response to national disaster situations such as terrorist attacks, rail crashes or floods, but the implantation was deeply flawed. Without doubt this episode in the history of IT procurement will go down as one of the most unforgiveable. Yet so far not a single one of the 6 Ministers involved have apologised-and no-one has been held to account for the scandalous waste of taxpayers money.
The shambles of the Fire Control project highlights the dangers of the mindset that can come with a long period in power, only listening to those who agree with you. Current Ministers beware!
Comments (5)
Subscribe to this posts's comments feed
It is not only the ex-ministers that should be held to account, but their Civil Servants.
In my days, civil servants were supposed to advise ministers and draw their attention to possible problems and advise as to whether there were any other options. It must be also noted that the cost went up from, I believe, an estimated £72 million to £500 million. Civil servants should have given their advice and warned of escalating costs. If they cannot prove that they did so, they should be held equally to blame, and the fact that the centres are being kept on a "care and maintenance" basis suggests to me that there are still civil servants who would like to revive the project once the dust has died down.
But the money wasted here is nothing compared with that wasted on the £12 billion NHS computer scheme, which according to the Mail is to be axed today.
22/09/2011 13:03If we need to call people to account over the fire control fiasco, we certainly need to see heads rolling over the NHS computer system. Whilst I accept that ministers cannot be expected to understand all the details of such a major projects, one would have expected them to have seen project plans, technical specifications, progress charts, running costs and have regular project reviews. In these days of "Special Advisers", why did they not take independent advice from an expert to check whether the civil service had got it wrong.
From personal experience, the general idea of those running a project is to underestimate the initial cost in order to get approval, and to not demand more money until it is past a stage where those at the top haven't the courage to call a halt. Throwing good money after bad is a typical civil service pursuit.
Kate Hoey, one of the few Labour MPs I have respect for and confidence in
22/09/2011 16:40John Prescott is behaving appallingly over this. He says he wasn't told, but he was told, frequently, and responded with incoherent complacency. It's all the fault of his civil servants who kept him in the dark, he says - but this thing was the brainchild of New Labour politicians, and fitted in with their approach to government - a massive IT project, untried, but it must be good because the unions opposed it and there's a company which is going to make a killing out of it. Prescott spent hundreds of millions of pounds on a system which he ought to have known would never work.
22/09/2011 23:27"Need to"?
Possibly "morally ought to", but the fact they do not "need to" is going to be completely adequately illustrated by the complete and utter lack of any consequences for them or anyone else when they don't.
23/09/2011 21:21Like my late gran -a Labour stalwart- used to say: "You can't tell a Labour Politician anything. Because they always come back with: "But we are Labour Politicians, so we know exactly what you want!"
25/09/2011 22:39