South Wales Evening Post - 15 August 2008
Swansea Council's controversial eGovernment programme has hit the headlines recently amid claims of rising costs and the project's failure. But with four of the five aims of the programme completed, should eGovernment really be branded a failure?
Council reporter ALEX BROWN investigates.
WHILE controversy rages over the final cost of Swansea Council's eGovernment programme, it would seem some want to dismiss the entire project as a failure.
However, of the five significant sections of the programme four have been successfully completed.
According to the council's cabinet member for top performance and eGovernment, Mary Jones, the finance, project costing, procurement and human resources (HR) sections have all been delivered.
The sticking point is, of course, the fifth section of the project - payroll - which has now been abandoned.
The council is currently in negotiations with IT firm CapGemini to decide how much money it will have to pay out.
But should the payroll debacle mean the project as a whole is a failure?
Since its launch, the programme has introduced a new IT system replacing dozens of outdated computer systems, saving the council time and money, and improving efficiency.
While detractors have claimed the £83 million IT deal has not delivered its promised savings, the Wales Audit Office has praised the programme for improving procurement and management information.
Last year the council's chief accountant labelled the authority's new computer system a phenomenon.
Mike Hawes was explaining how the £83 million system is transforming how council staff work.
Every year Mr Hawes and his staff deal with hundreds of millions of pounds, processing 265,000 payments with a workforce of 14,000, and he says the advantages are obvious.
"Quite frankly, it's a phenomenon," he said.
Councillor Jones said: "What people have to remember is why it was started in the first place. The reason was to modernise the council.
"The systems were 16-years-old.
"The finance system went on time and on budget, as did the procurement and project costing.
"HR went on time, but it did not go externally live, only in the department."
The cabinet member said the new finance system had transformed the way the council operates.
Councillor Jones said: "Under the Isis system, information is more readily available than was previously the case.
"For example, the council can now find out how much it spent on fuel in June, and how that compares with our estimates.
"The benefits include being able to challenge or even change our suppliers if we think we can get a better deal.
"It may sound unimportant, but the creation of financial codes is important for proper management of council spending.
"Previously it had to be done manually, with the person wanting the code having to ask finance for one and by finance having to create each code.
"It's a lot of work when there are thousands of transactions every year.
"Since going live, Isis has done the job automatically 20,000 times.
"As anyone who has to manage the family finances will know, knowing how much you're spending and what you're spending it on is vital if you're going to keep the household budge in order.
"Imagine having to do that for an organisation that employs 13,000 people.
"The council's new online purchasing system, known as i-Siop, has replaced paper-based ordering of goods and services.
Closely resembling any internet shopping website, i-Siop enables council staff to purchase the tools they need to do the job in a quick and easy way.
Councillor Jones said: "The council did not have a corporate procurement system. Orders were usually handwritten.
"The new purchasing process requires all items to be properly ordered and receipted before a payment can be made.
"This ensures the authority only pays for goods and services it has received, and buys from properly arranged contracts.
"It has made the business of doing business easier and cheaper."
But not everyone has been persuaded by the project.
Public sector union Unison raised concerns when the scheme was first mooted and members took industrial action over their fears.
Paul Elliott, head of local government at Unison, said the recent row over the scheme and its costs proved their concerns had been correct.
He added: "We believe our concerns over the arrangements with CapGemini have been proved accurate.
"Our initial concerns were that this project had not been thought through, and they had not considered alternatives.
"I think it is significant that they eventually looked at the Cardiff model which was an inhouse provision and much smaller."
Mr Elliott said that the whole process had been a blight on Swansea.
He added: "We think there needs to be far more consideration and thought before embarking on these expensive schemes.
"We believe the authority has wasted lots of taxpayers' money."
