Richard Bacon
From Nhs It Info
(South Norfolk, Conservative - Member, Public Accounts Committee)
House of Commons Debate (12 Feb 2004)
"The NPfIT concerns the provision for clinicians of electronic patient records, and it is costing a fortune. Estimates have varied. A recent announcement valued contracts in the region of £2.3 billion. That figure rose to £2.6 billion, and following the recent letting of quite a few contracts, it has reached some £4.2 billion. Indeed, it is expected to rise still higher. The problem is that however much money is spent on the programme, it will not work unless there is buy-in from the users. One of the classic problems with such projects is that the users are not consulted adequately or in time. The magazine Computer Weekly and the NPfIT itself jointly undertook a study of this issue. A health care market research firm called Medix undertook a survey of people in the health service who might need to have contact with the programme. It asked, "What consultation has there been with you personally about the NPfIT?" One per cent. described such consultation as "More than adequate"; 3 per cent. said it was "Adequate"; 8 per cent. said it was "Barely adequate"; and 11 per cent. said it was "Inadequate". However, 75 per cent. said of such consultation that there had been "None at all", and 2 per cent. were "Unsure". The NPfIT was so furious about these results that it issued its own press release, in which it completely ignored any of the survey's negative findings. Those who want to check the survey can do so easily, as it has helpfully been made available on the internet. That is one of the few ways in which IT manages to hoist itself by its own petard."
House of Commons Debate (29 Jun 2004)
"The project has seen Professor Peter Hutton, the chief clinical adviser, resign as chairman of the clinical advisory board, and until extremely recently the views of GPs had been largely ignored. Indeed, in respect of many of the other projects that we have considered, the advice of the National Audit Office concerning the need to consult early was also totally ignored. The NHS has contracted to buy far more systems in phase 1 than there is demand from hospital trusts, and in phase 2 the contractors will almost certainly be unable to meet the likely demand. Finally, GP magazine described the programme as "more likely to be a fiasco than the Dome"."
Parliamentary Question (20 Oct 2004)
"To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the financing arrangements are for the National Programme for IT in the national health service; and what steps the Government are taking to secure the buy-in of clinicians to the programme."
MP says Blair's NHS computer dream “won't work” (6 Aug 2006)
"The last few months have seen a succession of disasters for the NHS national programme for IT: The North West and West Midlands have seen the worst computer crash in NHS history; the London region has seen its major software supplier sacked and the Health Protection Agency warning of a serious risk to the health of children because IT failures have made a mess of vital vaccination programmes; the Nuffield Orthopaedic Hospital failed all waiting list targets as a direct result of the Connecting for Health deployment; and new systems in North West and West Midlands hospitals have repeatedly lost or mislaid patient records. The list of failures and delays grows ever longer. Two and a half years in, the programme is two years late” Now it seems that some of the most senior officials in the NHS know perfectly well that the National Programme will never work properly – indeed that many hospitals would now be better off if they had never taken part in the scheme in the first place. The National Programme has already cost well over a billion pounds and the final tally if it continues could rise to over £15 billion. Much of this money will be wasted. Worse still, the health of patients could be put at risk. This scheme was the personal brainchild of the Prime Minister and he must now act at once to bring this failed experiment to a speedy end."
Information Technology in the NHS: What Next? - by Richard Bacon MP and John Pugh MP (Sep 2006)
"The National Programme for IT in the NHS is currently sleepwalking towards disaster. It is far behind schedule. Projected costs have spiralled. Key software systems have little chance of ever working properly. Clinical staff are losing confidence in it. Many local Trusts are considering opting out of the programme altogether. These problems are a consequence of over-centralisation, over-ambition and an obsession with quick political fixes. But a reformed programme can still be rescued. Recent publicity and the shake-up already underway among Local Service Providers and key contractors provide an opportunity to do this, which must not be missed. What is required is to create a proper balance between central standards and central procurement where this offers demonstrable benefits, and local autonomy and responsibility. IT offers enormous potential benefits to the NHS, its staff and above all its patients. It is not too late to make sure that these benefits are properly delivered."
