Lord Falconer, the lord chancellor, said of the
Freedom of Information Act, "The more there is a culture of
openness, the better decision-making will be." He promised a
"change in way we are governed" because "real, informed
accountability improves standards".
But in IT there has been no transformation. Indeed, the
Office of Government Commerce, which oversees government IT, seems
more stirred by James Bond-style intrigue than Falconer's
entreaties on the need for open government.
In a briefing on the Freedom of Information Act, the OGC told
its teams of Gateway reviewers - who assess the progress of IT
projects at key stages in their lifecycle - that they "must
securely
dispose of the [Gateway] report and all supporting documents
immediately after the delivery of the final report".
The OGC seems to think that Gateway reviews reveal the keycodes
to Britain's nuclear secrets.
In refusing to publish them, the OGC is defying two
parliamentary committees, the information commissioner and the
Information Tribunal. And now the OGC and its ministers are
spending public money on a third appeal, in the High Court, to
try to keep the reviews secret.
IT specialists, MPs, suppliers and users have a right to know
whether Gateway reviewers deem risky projects feasible and well
managed. They are being denied that automatic right by the OGC.
The public puts its trust in government to spend money wisely.
It is an abuse of that trust to spend more money on legal fees to
defend the indefensible.
Falconer said that good government is open government. By the
same logic, bad government is secretive government. It is clear
which style of government is favoured by the OGC and its
ministers.
Government told to publish Gateway reviews on ID
cards >>
Legal fight over ID cards secrecy begins >>
Tony Collins'
blog: shredding of Gateway reviews >>
Comment on this article:
computer.weekly@rbi.co.uk