Farm subsidy I.T. fiasco

[Scunnered]

2 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

Aye - good attempt Scunnered ...

Pffft! Watch your tongue!  

I hold Calmac Mans opinion in high regard when it comes to the SNP, be it criticism, or dare I even say it... Praise.

 

[Orraloon]

i believe that 80% of Scottish farmers have received their payments but the other 20% are perfectly capable of doing enough whngin' for all of them put together, and then some. We shouldn't forget that they get this money for doing precisely fuk all, apart from filling in a few forms. The money doesn't all go to farmers either. A lot of it goes to the landowners, many of whom wouldn't know one end of a pig from another. Dodgy Dave might be able to help them with that one? A lot of these SPS entitlements are traded like investments. The money doesn't all go to farmers.

The whole system is shyte. It's just another one of the ways of transferring wealth from the poor to the already rich. 

[Toepoke]

Calmac Man shows in one post why he's been missed, and why he doesn't come on here much too...

[Parklife]

5 minutes ago, Toepoke said:

Calmac Man shows in one post why he's been missed, and why he doesn't come on here much too...

Exactly what i thought. An excellent, insightful post. 

It's completely ignored by everyone who had previously posted in the thread, except Ally Bear who, as he has no answer to Calmac's post, makes some lame attempt at humour. 

It's such a shame that so many people cannot see past their partisanship and look at things objectively. 

[Scunnered]

14 minutes ago, Toepoke said:

Calmac Man shows in one post why he's been missed, and why he doesn't come on here much too...

I miss so much him :(.  He's worth 1,617,989 Ersatz Thistles and Antidotes

[euan2020]

13 hours ago, Orraloon said:

ri believe that 80% of Scottish farmers have received their payments but the other 20% are perfectly capable of doing enough whngin' for all of them put together, and then some. We shouldn't forget that they get this money for doing precisely fuk all, apart from filling in a few forms. The money doesn't all go to farmers either. A lot of it goes to the landowners, many of whom wouldn't know one end of a pig from another. Dodgy Dave might be able to help them with that one? A lot of these SPS entitlements are traded like investments. The money doesn't all go to farmers.

The whole system is shyte. It's just another one of the ways of transferring wealth from the poor to the already rich. 

I think in 1 post you have perfectly explained, you nothing about, what you are speaking about

[thplinth]

So due to a botched IT project there is a danger Scotland will get fined by the EU for non compliance of the CAP rules.

And reading the article in the register the exact same thing has happened in England.

As several folk have pointed out big IT projects are notoriously risky (that monster NHS feck up being the best example you will get). The SNP government are not the first and certainly won't be the last to learn this lesson.

I notice the audit office are not suggesting anything corrupt occurred due to the conflict of interest just that it was not ideal and thus was subsequently closed with the removal of the director.

So to sum up the government messed up an IT project. 

 

[Ally Bongo]

1 hour ago, Parklife said:

 

It's completely ignored by everyone who had previously posted in the thread, except Ally Bear who, as he has no answer to Calmac's post, makes some lame attempt at humour. 

 

You really are a dick

 

 

[Parklife]

5 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

You really are a dick

I'm sure that i care not one jot what you think of me.

Your posts on this thread sum up your intellect perfectly though. 

[thplinth]

The article in the FT lamenting England's problems is almost a carbon copy of the OP in the Guardian... I post it as it has a paywall it seems.

 

Britain is facing fines of up to £180m a year after delays and cost overruns to a big IT project that channels European subsidies to farmers.

Whitehall officials will be questioned by MPs on Wednesday over problems with the Common Agricultural Policy Delivery Programme, which distributes £1.8bn a year to 105,000 farmers.

The digital system was launched this year to replace a problematic predecessor, which incurred £642m of late payment fines over the past decade.

It is one of Whitehall’s flagship projects in the wider drive to shift government business online and was named an exemplary project by the Government Digital Service.

But the system has gone 40 per cent over budget and is running late, according to a report by the National Audit Office, which blamed “counterproductive behaviour by senior leaders” in government.

The body which administers the payments, the Rural Payments Agency, paid out 38 per cent of claims on its first day of operation this month, according to the environment department’s own figures. That compares with 95 per cent of payments being made on the equivalent day last year under the old system.

The EU levies fines of up to 10 per cent of a country’s total farming subsidy if it thinks a state has not complied with its administration guidelines; as a result Britain could be fined up to £180m a year, the NAO warned.

The NAO said there were “deep rifts in working relationships and inappropriate behaviours at the senior leadership level”, meaning that the launch of the new system was delayed because of inadequate collaboration between government agencies.

The environment department and the Cabinet Office did not deal with competing priorities or create a “clear and consistent vision” for the project, the NAO found.

The House of Commons public accounts committee will question the government’s chief technology officer, Liam Maxwell, along with officials from the environment department and the Rural Payments Agency about the farm payments system on Wednesday.

A government spokesperson said that “while there was a problem with one part of the online interface” that farmers used to input their data, “the system has always worked and has successfully started making accurate payments to thousands of farmers on the very first day of the payment window”.

The payments agency will pay more than half of eligible claims by the end of this month and the vast majority by the end of January, according to the environment department.

The system would be “further improved” next year to make it easier for farmers to use, the spokesman added.

Sir Amyas Morse, the auditor general, said there were “serious lessons in this episode” for the environment department, the Rural Payments Agency and the Government Digital Service.

The project “does not represent value for money at this stage”, he said. “Costs have increased and systems functionality has not improved at the rate expected … The department faces difficulties paying farmers accurately and at the earliest opportunity.”

The rural payments system is just the latest in a long line of problematic public sector IT projects.

The Government Digital Service, which was set up under the coalition, aims to transform the government’s woeful record on technology. It has brought more tech specialists into Whitehall and aims to create more co-ordination and collaboration across government departments.

https://next.ft.com/content/1563c9aa-9dca-11e5-b45d-4812f209f861

[thplinth]

Maybe instead of making posts referencing other board members folk could post on the subject at hand.

[thplinth]

This article in the Express in March is also very interesting...

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/649187/Fiasco-British-EU-Farm-subsidies-scheme-could-cost-taxpayer-millions

'Fiasco' British scheme to pay £1.8bn in EU farm subsidies could 'cost taxpayers MILLIONS'

A BRITISH scheme to pay £1.8billion a year in EU farm subsidies descended into a "Whitehall fiasco" that could cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of pounds, MPs claimed yesterday.

They accused senior civil servants of "dysfunctional and inappropriate behaviour" as they indulged in a "childish turf war" over the the Common Agricultural Policy Delivery Programme.

The all-party Public Accounts Select Committee said the cost of the computer system for the Programme soared by 40 per cent from £155million to £215million.

And the Programme suffered from the inability of the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs, the Rural Payments Agency and the Government Digital Service to work effectively together in developing a single IT solution.

As a result farmers were paid late and Britain risks incurring fines of up to £180 million a year from Brussels.

"It was frankly embarrassing"
Public Accounts Select Committee

On December 1, 2015 - the first day of the payment window - the RPA paid only 38 per cent of farmers under the basic payment scheme compared with over 90 per cent in previous years.

In a damning report the committee said the Programme has been “unsuccessful in many respects”.

The report highlighted the impact of “dysfunctional and inappropriate behaviour” between senior officials, “potentially costing the taxpayer hundreds of millions of pounds in financial penalties”.

It added: “Highly paid public servants need to get the job done and such behaviour is unacceptable.”

The report slammed the Programme's focus on aspects of the computer system as “inappropriate for farmers" because many rural areas have poor broadband coverage.

PAC chairman Meg Hillier said: "This Programme was set up to deliver support to UK farmers. Instead, it delivered an appalling Whitehall fiasco.

“It was frankly embarrassing to learn of senior and highly paid civil servants arguing to the detriment of hard-pressed farmers.

“Explanations such as ‘We worked on different floors’ and ‘We dressed differently’ are a slap in the face to them and a dismal excuse for failures that could severely hit the public purse.

“A fundamental part of setting up this Programme should have been to establish a clear and robust vision of the final product, focused on the needs of farmers. For it to end up as a digital testing ground was wrong-headed.

“The enduring mental image is of managers, having seemingly lost sight of the purpose of the project, devoting their energies to a childish turf war instead."

A Defra spokesman said: "The new CAP is widely acknowledged as the most complex ever and the task of setting up a new IT system to handle this additional complexity was a significant challenge.

"Throughout this period the collective focus has always remained on getting payments out to farmers as quickly as possible.

"In March 2015 there was a problem with one part of the online interface that enabled farmers to put data directly into Rural Payments, but the core of the system has always worked.

"Over 87,000 farmers registered on the system and it has been used to process and pay over 70,800 farmers - over 80% of all those eligible - their 2015 Basic Payment Scheme payment, totalling £1.11 billion.

"Almost all farmers in England will be paid by the end of this month and the Rural Payments system has been further improved for 2016 to make it easier for farmers to apply for CAP payments.

 

Seems to me the civil servants are the source of the mess more than the politicians. By the way who does calmac work for again? (joke) 

Edited May 26, 2016 by thplinth

[Ally Bongo]

20 minutes ago, Parklife said:

I'm sure that i care not one jot what you think of me.

Your posts on this thread sum up your intellect perfectly though. 

 

On 20/05/2016 at 0:25 AM, Ally Bongo said:

SNP Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33504664

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1563c9aa-9dca-11e5-b45d-4812f209f861.html#axzz49F22Xqyy

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/12/01/uk_fine_180m_eu_botched_farm_payments/

 

 

On 21/05/2016 at 2:23 PM, Ally Bongo said:

Because it's clear it's not just a Scottish Government issue which the mainstream media would have us believe

 

1 hour ago, Parklife said:

Exactly what i thought. An excellent, insightful post. 

It's completely ignored by everyone who had previously posted in the thread, except Ally Bear who, as he has no answer to Calmac's post, makes some lame attempt at humour. 

It's such a shame that so many people cannot see past their partisanship and look at things objectively. 

If it comes to reviewing peoples posts surely one can quite clearly see at the same time what an insidious little turd you are ?

 

[Parklife]

3 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

 

 

 

If it comes to reviewing peoples posts surely one can quite clearly see at the same time what an insidious little turd you are ?

 

Abusing me won't change the fact that you've been made to look like a prize fud on this thread, dude  

[Ally Bongo]

8 minutes ago, Parklife said:

Abusing me won't change the fact that you've been made to look like a prize fud on this thread, dude  

Only in your mind

 

[Orraloon]

1 hour ago, euan2020 said:

I think in 1 post you have perfectly explained, you nothing about, what you are speaking about

I will admit that this wouldn't be my chosen subject on Mastermind. And I could probably do with some education on the subject from an expert like yourself. Any particular bit that you disagree with?

The Dodgy Dave bit was a joke as I'm not actually sure he does know one end from the other.

[TDYER63]

1 hour ago, Orraloon said:

I will admit that this wouldn't be my chosen subject on Mastermind. And I could probably do with some education on the subject from an expert like yourself. Any particular bit that you disagree with?

The Dodgy Dave bit was a joke as I'm not actually sure he does know one end from the other.

Only if the subsidy was  paid in South African Rand and remitted by RBS. 

[thplinth]

Reading between the lines and calmac's sudden return to post on this rather obscure subject I suspect there is a massive blame game going on between the Scottish government and the Scottish civil service over who and what made an arse of this so badly. 

[Auld_Reekie]

End result is the same - SNP will look like idiots. Worrying if that is replicated across other Scottish Government departments.

Edited May 26, 2016 by Auld_Reekie

[Scunnered]

2 hours ago, Ally Bongo said:

Only in your mind

 

No.  Pretty sure that's not accurate.

[Ally Bongo]

33 minutes ago, Scunnered said:

No.  Pretty sure that's not accurate.

Surely a boyfriend's view would be treated as bias ?

[TDYER63]

2 hours ago, Parklife said:

Abusing me won't change the fact that you've been made to look like a prize fud on this thread, dude  

In my mind, anyone over the age of 15 that uses the word 'dude' , jokingly or not, is a prize fud.

It is possible that , like me, some posters do not know who Calmac is and therefore have no idea if this is a random poster spouting nonsense or someone with proper insight into what is happening. I personally thought it was an excellent post and if the contents are correct then in this particular  instance it does not paint the Scottish Government in a good light whatsoever. 

Given the warm reception he/she has received on their post from long term posters, plus the frank and honest  construction of the post , I would suggest the comments are credible. 

[Ally Bongo]

8 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

In my mind, anyone over the age of 15 that uses the word 'dude' , jokingly or not, is a prize fud.

It is possible that , like me, some posters do not know who Calmac is and therefore have no idea if this is a random poster spouting nonsense or someone with proper insight into what is happening. I personally thought it was an excellent post and if the contents are correct then in this particular  instance it does not paint the Scottish Government in a good light whatsoever. 

Given the warm reception he/she has received on their post from long term posters, plus the frank and honest  construction of the post , I would suggest the comments are credible. 

To be honest i was having a wee joke which i thought was patently obvious to everyone

However instead of taking it as such and having a wee laughing emoticon as a response Scunnered decided to reply in a serious sensible tone clearly realising that Calmac has in this instance given him some sort of validation for his hatred of the SNP and did not in any way want any deflections from that.

Then his boyfriend jumped on board with a post which appears to all and sundry as if he has been desperate to get a dig in at me.

Id like to point out that my use of the word boyfriend in no way attempts to suggest anything other than two posters who take a keen interest in what the other posts and backs them up when neccesary 

You cant have one without the other

[phart]

I use dude as part of my vernacular. However I never put any faith in absolute statements or their makers. The judgements of absolutists mean nothing at all.

Calmac is the boards doxxer extraordinaire.

Looks like loads of over-paid under-talented arseholes arguing about who is the best, rather than getting on with the job. This would be my judgement after spending 6 minutes reading about it.

[TDYER63]

17 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

To be honest i was having a wee joke which i thought was patently obvious to everyone

However instead of taking it as such and having a wee laughing emoticon as a response Scunnered decided to reply in a serious sensible tone clearly realising that Calmac has in this instance given him some sort of validation for his hatred of the SNP and did not in any way want any deflections from that.

Then his boyfriend jumped on board with a post which appears to all and sundry as if he has been desperate to get a dig in at me.

Id like to point out that my use of the word boyfriend in no way attempts to suggest anything other than two posters who take a keen interest in what the other posts and backs them up when neccesary 

You cant have one without the other

Sorry, must have missed the joke inbetween prize fud/insidious turd ?