Skip to main content

NHS: Information and Communications Technology

Volume 486: debated on Monday 12 January 2009

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what fines have been (a) levied against and (b) paid by CSC for late delivery of the Lorenzo system; whether local service providers will be paid for upgrades from interim solutions to Lorenzo; and whether the local service providers will pay hospitals' costs incurred in upgrading from such interim solutions where they have been installed. (243192)

National programme for information technology contracts do not contain provision for “fines”, but do provide for delay deductions to be paid by the local service provider (LSP) should the LSP fail to achieve certain key milestones. Under these arrangements some £22.7 million has to date been paid by the Computer Sciences Corporation, some of which has been earned back.

The LSP is paid for all deployments including upgrades from agreed interim solutions to Lorenzo. The deployment of interim solutions allows the trust to gain early benefit from business change that will be required when Lorenzo is implemented.

The local implementation costs of national programme systems and services, including upgrading from agreed interim systems are paid by the NHS bodies that benefit from them and they receive funding out of normal NHS allocations.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health with reference to the answer of 12 November 2008, on NHS: information and communications technology, if he will place in the Library a copy of each of the breach of contract notices sent to Fujitsu. (246030)

Publication of the breach of contract notices issued to Fujitsu, in the context of ongoing negotiations to reach an agreement with the company, would put that objective at risk and could potentially compromise the Department's position in any possible future litigation. Either outcome would or would be likely to cause prejudice to the commercial interests of the Department.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health with reference to the answer of 12 November 2008, on NHS: information and communications technology, how many contractor event of default notices have been issued; on what dates and to whom such notices have been issued; what the reasons for issue were in each case; and if he will place in the Library a copy of each such notice. (246031)

As part of the normal contractual processes, a number of contractor event of default notices have been issued, reflecting operational matters identified during the normal course of contract delivery that need to be addressed. The majority of the matters identified have been addressed using the existing contractual remedies.

The information requested is in the table.

Contractor/Date of issue

Reason for Notice

Atos

15 December 2006

Failure to meet performance requirement

10 March 2008

Critical service level failure

10 March 2008

Critical service level failure

20 June 2008

Failure to achieve a key milestone

5 November 2008

Critical service level failure

8 December 2008

Critical service level failure

Accenture

3 March 2008

Critical service level failure

12 March 2008

Critical service level failure

22 April 2008

Critical service level failure

CSC

3 March 2008

Critical service level failure

22 April 2008

Critical service level failure

30 August 2007

Failure to achieve a release key milestone

30 August 2007

Failure to achieve a release key milestone

30 August 2007

Failure to achieve a release key milestone

30 August 2007

Failure to achieve a release key milestone

30 August 2007

Failure to achieve a release key milestone

30 August 2007

Failure to achieve a release key milestone

1 October 2007

Failure to achieve a release key milestone

1 October 2007

Failure to achieve a release key milestone

1 October 2007

Failure to achieve a release key milestone

1 November 2007

Failure to achieve a release key milestone

1 November 2007

Failure to achieve a release key milestone

1 November 2007

Failure to achieve a release key milestone

2 June 2008

Failure to achieve early adopter release key milestone

2 June 2008

Failure to achieve early adopter release key milestone

2 June 2008

Failure to achieve early adopter release key milestone

8 July 2008

Failure to achieve early adopter interim milestone

2 September 2008

Failure to achieve a release key milestone

10 June 2008

Failure to achieve early adopter interim milestone

10 June 2008

Failure to achieve early adopter interim milestone

Fujitsu

20 February 2008

Failure to achieve deployment interim milestone

20 February 2008

Failure to achieve deployment interim milestone

20 February 2008

Failure to achieve deployment interim milestone

20 February 2008

Failure to achieve deployment interim milestone

20 February 2008

Failure to achieve deployment interim milestone

20 February 2008

Failure to achieve deployment interim milestone

20 February 2008

Failure to achieve key milestone

20 February 2008

Critical service level failure

20 February 2008

Failure to control account data

29 February 2008

Failure to achieve deployment milestone

29 February 2008

Failure to achieve deployment milestone

29 February 2008

Failure to achieve deployment milestone

29 February 2008

Failure to achieve deployment milestone

29 February 2008

Failure to achieve deployment milestone

29 February 2008

Critical service level failure

29 February 2008

Critical service level failure

17 April 2008

Failure to achieve deployment milestone

17 April 2008

Failure to make delay deductions payment for missed milestones

17 April 2008

Failure to meet contracted service levels

17 April 2008

Failure to provide risk assessments

17 April 2008

Failure to provide detailed costs and analysis

17 April 2008

Failure to provide project resource data

17 April 2008

Failure to achieve deployment milestones

17 April 2008

Failure to achieve deployment milestones

17 April 2008

Failure to provide contractor event of default information

17 April 2008

Failure to provide documentation on unauthorised access to data

17 April 2008

Failure to implement data set change notice

17 April 2008

Failure to implement data set change notice

17 April 2008

Failure to implement data set change notice

17 April 2008

Failure to implement data set change notice

17 April 2008

Failure to implement data set change notice

17 April 2008

Failure to implement data set change notice

17 April 2008

Failure to implement data set change notice

17 April 2008

Failure to implement data set change notice

17 April 2008

Failure to implement data set change notice

17 April 2008

Failure to implement data set change notice

17 April 2008

Failure to implement data set change notice

17 April 2008

Failure to implement data set change notice

17 April 2008

Failure to implement data set change notice

17 April 2008

Failure to implement data set change notice

17 April 2008

Failure to update exit plan

BT

24 May 2004

Failure to meet N3 milestone

6 October 2004

Failure to achieve installation target

6 October 2004

Failure to meet N3 milestone

18 July 2005

Critical service level failure

26 September 2005

Critical service level failure

26 September 2005

Critical service level failure

July 2007

6 x Critical service level failures

August 2007

15 x Critical service level failures

September 2007

14 x Critical service level failures

October 2007

18 x Critical service level failures

November 2007

10 x Critical service level failures

December 2007

6 x Critical service level failures

January 2008

5 x Critical service level failures

February 2008

3 x Critical service level failures

March 2008

6 x Critical service level failures

April 2008

3 x Critical service level failures

May 2008

2 x Critical service level failures

June 2008

9 x Critical service level failures

July 2008

9 x Critical service level failures

September 2008

21 x Critical service level failures

Publication of contractor event of default notices would or would be likely to cause prejudice to the commercial interests of the providers concerned. It would also potentially compromise the Department's position in any possible future formal contractual disputes, which in turn would or would be likely to cause prejudice to the commercial interests of the Department.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health with reference to the answer of 24 November 2008, Official Report, column 930W, on NHS: information and communications technology, how many one-off payments have been made. (246033)

The total number of payments relating to deployments made to local service providers (LSPs) since the inception of the contracts is 107. This includes a number of forward payments, a proportion of which have subsequently been depleted in recognition of successful deployments.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health with reference to the answer of 24 November 2008, Official Report, column 930W, on NHS: information and communications technology, (1) what payments have been made to aid with suppliers' capital costs under Connecting for Health and the London Programme for IT; (246034)

(2) what payments have been made in advance to aid with Fujitsu's capital costs; and what mechanism there is for recouping those payments in the case of work not completed.

The information requested is in the following table.

Contract

Total forward payments (£ million)

London LSP

333.18

South (Fujitsu)

486.05

Forward payments are repayable on demand in the event of non-delivery.