MPs probe government over EDS

Questions over sacking the supplier...

MPs have asked the government whether they will sack EDS over continuing IT problems in the Child Support Agency (CSA).

Earlier this year the CSA spent £11.5m in overtime costs after EDS installed a £450m computer system that MPs later said was an "appalling waste of public money".

Yesterday in parliament, Conservative MP Paul Goodman asked James Plaskitt, parliamentary under-secretary for the Department for Work and Pensions, whether the government would scrap EDS from the CSA IT project.

He said: "What position has been reached as to the nuclear option of sacking EDS? Has it been ruled out? As he asked his predecessor so forcefully, when will the transfer from the old system to the new take place?"

Plaskitt replied that the government is trying to negotiate with the supplier. "We are trying to sort it out. That is the bottom-line answer," he said. "If honourable Members are considering the option of scrapping it, what should replace it? We cannot leave a vacuum in which children are unsupported and the maintenance is not flowing. That would simply not be acceptable."

The rollout of EDS' CS2 system was delayed by two years. Since its introduction in 2003 the CSA has writen off £1bn in claims, while around £750m in child support payments remain uncollected. The CSA is currently writing a report on the cost of the delay.

Liberal Democrat MP Sandra Gidley said that her constituents had complained of severe delays in payouts because of the system: "Last year, however, I had an interesting case in which the excuse for the inability of the computer to recognise the sort code was that it began with a zero. Perhaps I am being naive but we are talking about an IT system that is involved with large amounts of money. It should not be that difficult to tweak things so that a sort code beginning with zero can be recognised.

"Let me highlight how inefficient the UK system is. For every pound we spend on administration, £1.86 is collected. The computers, the management and so forth can be blamed - indeed, there is much to be blamed for - but it appears that no solutions are being offered. Sadly, many people are coming to the conclusion that the CSA is the biggest administrative disaster in the history of the welfare state."

Plaskitt tried to reassure MPs that his department was working on the matter.

He said: "I have described [staff] sometimes as being asked to work with one hand tied behind their back. They are dealing with an overcomplicated system and IT that lets them down. All those problems have to be solved and progress will be as much welcomed by the staff who struggle with the system as by those of us and our constituents who are caught up in it," he said.