States of Guernsey to axe IT provider Agilysis
The States of Guernsey is set to axe its contract with IT infrastructure company Agilisys by the end of July - half way through its 10-year tenure. It follows a critical report of Agilisys' digital services across a range of government departments, published earlier this year.The move will see IT provided by multiple providers which the States said would improve accountability and the reliability of services for islanders.Agilisys has been approached for comment.
The Policy & Resources Committee (P&R) said the decision to terminate the current contract was unanimous and in the "best interests of the States, and the wider community which relies on the many IT systems we have for the effective delivery of public services".Boley Smillie, chief executive and head of the public service, said the move would ensure better value for money for taxpayers. Mr Smillie said switching to a "multi-vendor model" would deliver better specialist services.He said: "We must keep pace with digital solutions that the community not only expects but deserves, solutions that make our services more efficient, and responsive to the needs of the Bailiwick."
'Increase supplier accountability'
Agilisys signed a £200m contract for the delivery of the majority of States IT services in 2019 but faced major IT outages and concerns over the number of staff with technical expertise to deliver service.Gé Drossaert, The States' chief digital and information officer, said: "This new model will increase supplier accountability to deliver, unlike the current model where we have been reliant on one provider only, as we will have relationships with a range of providers."The States said it was currently in discussions behind the scenes with a range of providers to take on the work and this would be announced at a later date.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
Additional funding will avoid public services cliff-edge, says O'Dowd
Additional money for public services in Northern Ireland will avoid a potential funding 'cliff-edge', Stormont's Finance Minister John O'Dowd has said. Mr O'Dowd said he had reached an agreement with the Treasury over an additional £600 million to support public services in the region. He said it brought the total extra funding provided for the region to £1.3 billion. Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones said the Northern Ireland Executive will 'receive the largest real-term settlement since the 1998 Good Friday Agreement' following the Government's spending review. He added: 'The Executive will be receiving over 24% more per person than equivalent UK Government spending in the rest of the United Kingdom. 'That means the Executive will be receiving £19.3 billion per year on average between 2026-27 and 2028-29 with an average extra £1.2 billion through the Barnett formula per year, made up of £1 billion of day-to-day spending and £220 million of capital for that four-year period.' Mr Jones said there would also be additional funding of £137 million over three years to tackle paramilitarism and organised crime, £11 million over three years to fund community development projects, £310 million over four years for city and growth deals and £185 million over three years for public service transformation and £2 million for integrated education. Mr O'Dowd said agreement had been reached with the Treasury after months of negotiations. He said: 'It will deliver an additional £600 million of funding provided for vital public services here. 'This will enable the Executive to take a long-term strategic approach to public service delivery. 'It helps avoid the potential cliff-edge in public funding that could have occurred when the restoration financial package comes to an end and the resulting damage this would have done to frontline public services.' Mr O'Dowd said the Treasury had agreed to exclude £329 million of agriculture funding from the relative funding calculation for Northern Ireland. He said: 'Without this agreement the Executive would have received £600 million less in funding over the spending review period. 'The agreement we have reached with Treasury will see us funded above 124% excluding agriculture between 2026-27 and 2028-29. 'The inclusion of agriculture and non-Barnett funding increases this to 128%.' Mr O'Dowd added: 'Since taking up the role of Finance Minister I have consistently said I would do everything in my power to ensure our public services are fairly and properly funded. 'This agreement will see £600 million more for public services over the spending review period, providing additional investment in the services that we all rely on and delivers on my commitment to support workers, families and communities.' People Before Profit MLA Gerry Carroll said the spending review had failed to deliver for working people in Northern Ireland. He said: 'Once again, the British government has shown that its economic agenda is incapable of delivering for ordinary people.'
Telegraph
4 hours ago
- Telegraph
The Daily T: ‘Spending like a drunken sailor'– Rachel Reeves's splurge-a-thon
Chancellor Rachel Reeves has unveiled her first major spending review, pledging tens of billions in additional funding for public services, including £29 billion a year for the NHS, a £4.5 billion boost to the schools budget, and a rise in defence spending to 2.6% of GDP by 2027. But Reeves stopped short of explaining how the government will actually fund these ambitious commitments, fuelling Tory warnings of looming tax hikes. Shadow chancellor Mel Stride accused her of having 'completely lost control', calling it a 'spend now, tax later' plan that kicks tough choices down the road for Labour. So how will the Government balance the books? And what will the spending review mean for you? Camilla is outside Parliament with Reform's Richard Tice who says Reeves is 'cratering the economy' and is obsessed with his party. Plus, Tory Andrew Griffith explains why his party has disowned Liz Truss's economics and Labour MP's Chris Curtis says today's plans will help his party 'stand up to the forces of people like Nigel Farage'.
Telegraph
8 hours ago
- Telegraph
Reeves's spending plans were very popular with one key group: Labour MPs
Labour MPs liked it, and perhaps that should tell us everything we need to know about Rachel Reeves's spending review announcement in the Commons. Their enthusiastic shouts of 'More!' as the chancellor reached her peroration sounded genuine enough. And why wouldn't they? No chancellor of the exchequer ever became less popular by announcing large amounts of dosh for public services. Reeves painted a rosy picture of the future, a far cry from her and her boss, Keir Starmer's initial outings at the despatch box in the aftermath of last year's general election, when made Private Frazer from 'Dad's Army' sound like a ray of sunshine. They've since taken the hint and decided that a return to Labour's traditional practice of throwing loads of cash at everything helps cheer everyone up – particularly stressed Labour back benchers. One of the few cash saving schemes within her statement was perhaps not so popular with Labour MPs, and certainly not with party activists listening at home: the asylum backlog will be cut (but there was no indication of the likely scale of this cut or whether the threshold for achieving official refugee status will be lowered in order to reduce the official numbers of asylum seekers), more appeal cases will be heard and those who have no right to be here will be returned. A manifesto commitment to end the use of hotels by asylum seekers will be met by the end of the parliament, saving a billion pounds for the Treasury. But the biggest cheers from the government benches came in response to Reeves's announcement of £39 billion for new social and affordable house building. The deputy prime minister, Angela Rayner, looked especially pleased at this, which is unsurprising since her own department has responsibility for meeting her party's promise to build 1.5 million new homes by the time of the next election. But the £39 billion pledged today was not for spending in the next three or four years left of this parliament: it was for the next 10 years, which means, assuming broadly equal levels of spend each year, less than £16 billion to be spent on the project before the deadline mandated by Labour's own manifesto looms. Oddly, for a party with only five MPs, Reform UK and its leader came in for a disproportionate amount of attention from Reeves. Nigel Farage was targeted for having expressed support in the past for Liz Truss's disastrous 'fiscal event' and the unfunded tax cuts that accompanied it. It seemed odd that Reeves and her allies thought there was still mileage left in an event that happened three years ago. Maybe they'll fight next year's May elections by attacking Margaret Thatcher's poll tax. And by the time the chancellor got round to announcing the inevitable 'record' budget increases for the NHS – three per cent in each of the years covered by the spending review – she had come up with another zinger, reminding the House that Farage had once expressed support for an insurance-based health system. This might not be as productive a line of attack for the government as it blithely assumes. Given the consistently poor performance of the NHS over many years, and given that no one seriously expects things to improve, however much extra cash is thrown at it, it is not inconceivable that the kind of angry and disillusioned voter that Reform has successfully attracted to its ranks could be persuaded that maybe a different approach is, after all, worth considering. After all, most EU countries have some sort of insurance element within their funding models, yet they also manage to provide medical care free at the point of need. And aren't Labour MPs fans of everything Europe does (apart from regularly electing far-Right parties to government, of course)? The real success of fiscal events like today's can never be accurately judged until hours after everyone has left the chamber and headed to the tearoom to chat about it and stock up on publicly-subsidised calories. But even before the economics experts have had a chance to go over the details, Chancellor Reeves can congratulate herself for at least sounding more like a cheerleader for the government, rather than an undertaker. Baby steps, chancellor. Baby steps.
