It’s unclear why there is so much secrecy over Microsoft’s dealings with the NHS which are, after all, in the interests of taxpayers.
Officials at the Department of Health say that the NHS receives exceptionally low prices for Microsoft licences. But the details are subject to confidentiality clauses.
They have declined to give the House of Commons’ Public Accounts Committee any information on the:
– committed volume of business which the NHS has agreed with Microsoft
– the total cost of the commitment
– the maximum potential financial penalty for non-compliance.
And in October 2007 there will be a unique event at Microsoft’s headquarters at which the supplier’s worldwide CEO Steve Ballmer will have an opportunity to address the chief executives of primary care trusts across England on the £12.4bn National Programme for IT [NPfIT]. The Chief Executive of the NHS David Nicholson will also be present.
Gordon Brown, his ministers, the Department of Health and NHS Connecting for Health, which runs part of the NPfIT, are confident that the programme is already a success.
Officials, then, should have nothing to fear if any trust chief executives at the October event express misgivings about the NPfIT or facets of it. If the NPfIT is a success, officials will be able, with authority, to counter any concerns and criticisms.
So why has the Department of Health NHS Connecting for Health barred the media from attending this unique event?
One begins to wonder whether officials are concerned that they may have no credible responses if chief executives of trusts express concerns about the NPfIT at the October event.
The chief executives may be wholly supportive of the NPfIT, congratulate Nicholson and his officials for what has been achieved and make clear their confidence about the future of the programme.
Or some may ask:
– about future funding for the programme given their other priorities and commitments and, in some cases, deficits
– what happens if the core software for the Care Records Service continues to be delayed
– why they should commit to the NPfIT when some trusts have experienced serious disruption when implementing national systems
– why, when their old systems need replacing urgently, they should commit to interim solutions from NPfIT local service providers whose software may be inferior to non-NPfIT products
– whether the £2.5bn spent on the NPfIT is value for money
One wonders if the government wants to prevent reporting of any such concerns because they could conflict with ministerial messages about the success of the NPfIT.
Microsoft’s spokeswoman would not even confirm that Steve Ballmer would be speaking at the October event. And when I asked NHS Connecting for Health whether I could cover the event, its spokeswoman said:
“Thanks for your interest but this is a closed event so you will not be able to attend.”
The Department of Health says that attendance is “by invitation only”. Even invitations to primary care trusts are extended only to the chief executive, the chair of the trust’s professional executive committee or the chairman of the board. There is only place per trust.
David Nicholson complained in January 2007 that NHS Connecting for Health had a bunker mentality. He wanted more openness. Now it’s looking as if the government as a whole is making defensiveness and secrecy over the NPfIT a matter of policy.
If the NPfIT is the success the government claims, why does it shrink from the scrutiny of the press and an independent review of the programme?