The public sector is ignoring government guidelines on procuring open-source software, according to open-source database company Ingres.
At a roundtable event on Thursday, Ingres worldwide operations chief Steve Shine praised the guidelines — issued in February — but said they were being ignored because there is is nobody in place to enforce them.
"The UK has one of the best-written policies out there — the problem is policing it," Shine said. "There is no link today [between] that document and the tender process. I think it's not come through because there isn't a clear body responsible for enforcing it all."
Shine said several software tenders had taken place since the Chief Information Officer Council issued the guidelines, but none took the policy into account and all had opted for proprietary systems.
The policy recommends that where open-source and proprietary alternatives are on offer at a similar price, open source should be favoured due to its lower exit and transition costs.
Jeremy Tuck, chief information officer at Islington Council, agreed that he had seen "no real incentive to choose open source" apart from the policy recommendations themselves.
The guidelines, entitled Open Source, Open Standards and Re-Use, were written up by the then minister for digital engagement, Tom Watson, who said at the time that he hoped the policy would encourage more government departments to use open source.
Watson also warned against public-sector organisations becoming locked in to proprietary software, and said the government would "require those proposing proprietary software to specify how exit would be achieved".
ZDNet UK asked the Cabinet Office on Friday for comment on the government's software-procurement policies since the guidelines were issued, but had received no reply at the time of writing.
Talkback
UK government ass end first again eh, but why should they care after all they just keep dipping into that bottomless pitt called the British tax payers.
Now, there's a shock - politicians compiling excellent-looking documents on money-saving ideas that voters would be happy to see them implement, but in the end there's utterly no change from the status quo. The leader of the opposition was making big noises about FOSS as if he even knew what the acronym stands for, but that was at a time when there was speculation that Gordon Brown may have called an election. Since no election was called for and considerable time has passed, no politicians are talking about FOSS.
All that politicians are good at is politicking. If you expect more than that you'll be disappointed. As far as implementing FOSS solutions is concerned, there just aren't enough support engineers with Linux skills in Britain. I was one of the MS-is-the-only-operating-system brigade - I used to dismiss Linux as an old "has been" system until someone put an Ubuntu 6 disk in my hand a few years ago. Existing engineers who support Microsoft-based networks, especially here in Britain, do not want to learn any other system. I doubt whether the House of Commons could even find a support company to handle their change over. Someone who knows what it's all about would have to lead them. Now, politicians are hardly known for their willingness to be led by some lesser creatures like us, are they?
As Billy Connolly said: "The desire to be a politician should mean that they are automatically barred from ever being one" and: "Don't vote for them - it'll only encourage them".