After three months, the High Court battle between National Air
Traffic Services (Nats) and its supplier EDS over the computer
systems for the Oceanic control centre has reached a
settlement.
One of the more interesting elements to this case has been the
evidence of Bill Semple, former chief executive of Nats, regarding
comments he made to the House of Commons Transport Select Committee
in 1999 about the progress of the Oceanic air traffic control
system being built by EDS.
Semple gave the committee the impression that the system enjoyed
the rudest of health. In reality, some Nats executives disagreed
with Semple's assessment. Far from being "world-class", they
thought the system might never be suitable for operational use. But
Semple did not communicate any of the contractual difficulties to
the committee.
Six months later Nats terminated its £50m contract with EDS.
Quizzed in the High Court about his optimistic report to the select
committee, Semple said he had thought it inappropriate to wash
Nats' "dirty linen" in public.
There is no doubt that Semple told the truth. Yet a gap remained
between this truth and the committee members' understanding of it.
Select committees cannot provide the necessary independent and
vigorous monitoring of public sector projects if they are not given
the full facts. Yet again, we see a lack of accountability manifest
in the communication of the progress of a public sector project to
the very body that sits to provide an oversight of such schemes.