Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.
AIA

E-government: 'Could do better,' say MPs

by
28th Apr 2008
Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

Commons Public Accounts CommitteeThe government, which spends an estimated £208m a year delivering services and information online, is unable to account for how well the sites are performing, according to the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee. John Stokdyk examines its latest report.

The House of Commons Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has had its eye on Tony Blair's e-government explosion for some time now. Its 16th report of the 2007-08 parliamentary session, 'Government on the Internet: Progress in delivering information and services online', follows up a similar study carried out in 2002.

PAC report: key findings

1. The government does not know exactly how many websites it operates, although it could be as many as 2,500. No new sites should be established without the agreement of the Government’s Chief Information Officer.

2. Over a quarter of government organisations still do not know the costs of their websites, making it impossible to assess whether they are value for money.

3. 16% of government organisations have no data about how their websites are being used, inhibiting website improvements.

4. The quality of government websites has improved only slightly since 2002.

5. The website direct.gov.uk is set to become one of the main ways of delivering public services and so must be reliable and maintained to a high standard.

6. One third of government websites do not comply with the Government’s own user accessibility standards, making it difficult for people with disabilities to use the sites.

7. The Government does not know how much it is saving through internet services, nor whether any savings are being redeployed to improve services for people who do not or cannot use the internet.

8. There is a risk that some people will not benefit from the Government’s drive to expand the use of the internet for delivering public services and social exclusion may be reinforced.

9. Government organisations have yet to decide how they should engage with intermediaries, such as family members, friends or representatives, who access online services on behalf of others.
Source: PAC report: Government on the internet

The latest study comes to some very similar conclusion to the previous study - and the one before that. The MPs commented, "In 2002, our predecessors concluded that there had been a lack of progress in implementing the recommendations from an earlier report. Five years on, a quarter of government organisations still cannot provide data on the cost of their websites. And, where data were provided, over 40% of organisations provided only estimates. Further, 16% of government organisations do not have a good knowledge about the users of their websites. Even where user data are being collected, they are not always being used to inform and improve websites."

The e-government movement is an important plank of New Labour's modernisation programme. In 1997, Tony Blair set an overly ambitious target to provide access to all relevant government services in electronic form by 2005. While that target has been quietly forgotten, his successors continue to promote electronic channels for tasks such as filing tax returns, renewing vehicle excise duty and official recruitment.

"For many millions of people, the internet has become the preferred way of conducting many every-day transactions, from banking to booking a holiday. It is often faster, easier to use and more convenient, with services available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The internet has also become an important way of improving the delivery of public services," the MPs noted.

The PAC report quotes estimates from Sir David Varney's review of HMRC online services that up to £400m could be saved through electronic service delivery.

However, the e-government drive resulted in "uncoordinated growth" during the past decade, so that the government is now unable to say how many sites now exist. According to the National Audit Office, there could be as many as 2,500 government websites.

Overall, however, the quality of government websites has improved only slightly since 2002. But the profusion of official websites has made it difficult for users to find information and services, and the PAC found that the site's search engines are generally poor. A third of the sites also did not meet the Cabinet Office's own user accessibility standards.

To redress the situation, the government is shifting its internet strategy to two sites, direct.gov.uk and www.businesslink.gov.uk. The move has already started, and by 2011 all official information and services should be hosted on these two sites, resulting in the closure of around 1,000 redundant sites. Central government departments will continue to run their own, smaller websites to document policy and research information only.

Introducing the report, PAC chairman Edward Leigh commented, "The internet is transforming the way in which government communicates with and provides services to citizens. But the government's enthusiastic embrace of this new world of web-delivered services is not matched by a commensurate level of understanding of what it is achieving through its websites, how effective they are or whether they represent value for money."

Leigh was concerned about the uncontrolled growth of government and welcomed the move to streamlining web services around direct.gov.uk and businesslink.gov.uk. But he warned, "It is essential that the DWP, the department responsible for these sites, should arrange for regular independent reviews of how they are developing and the associated risks."

While internet services were cheaper and more efficient at delivering government services and information, Leigh noted that 75% of "socially excluded" people and 51% of people on low incomes - who were more likely to need government help and advice - do not use the internet. "They must not be left behind as the government's use of the internet gathers pace," he said.

Leigh and his committee generally do a good job at keeping the government on its toes and focused on attaining value for money. But all the PAC can do is publish reports that slide into an ever-growing pile of historical curiosity - much like the previous two publications on government web strategies.

The latest edition never really transcends the usual generalities. HMRC's online services, for example, have probably made the biggest impact of all the government's web services. A closer study of the plus points and shortcomings of the tax department's websites, for example, might have produced some more enlightenting conclusions that could apply to other government services.

Tags:

Replies (1)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By skeapingk
07th May 2008 19:06

PAC Committee should try 'online' itself
Why doesn''t Edward Leigh, chairman of the PAC Committee get
off his [***], and recommend some positive things for the public to get
more out of www.direct.gov?

Any second grade 5th former can tell the PAC Committtee that
motivation is all about providing positive guidance, not continually
carping........

Thanks (0)