A key report into the NHS's massive IT upgrade programme was watered down by the Government before publication, it has emerged.
The BBC's World at One radio programme revealed on Friday that it had obtained an early version of the report, which was conducted by the National Audit Office. This version contained several criticisms of the project. But in the final version, some criticisms had been removed and replaced with less controversial statements.
One UK IT expert who was involved with the NAO report confirmed to ZDNet UK that changes were made to the draft report after it was circulated to various interested parties, including the UK Government, at the start of this year. He expressed unhappiness that important recommendations weren't included in the final version.
A warning that there are "insufficient trainers to train NHS staff", became a warning that a lack of knowledge could be a major barrier to implementation. A claim that the Government has been "slow in securing the engagement and commitment of the NHS to the programme" was removed, and replaced with a recommendation that more work was needed on engagement.
Opposition politicians have expressed concern that the changes were made, but the NAO has insisted that the report's overall conclusions were unchanged.
The final report was published in June 2006. It had been expected to criticise the project, but was actually seen as broadly supportive.
Speaking after the report's publication in June, government ministers bullishly declared that they had 'learned from previous failures'.
Later that month, MPs criticised the NAO for the "gushing" and "universally positive tone" of its report, and claimed it had been intimidated by the Department of Health.
You can see the draft report on the BBC Web site. The final report can be downloaded from the NAO.
Talkback
Amusingly the redacted sections of the draft report can be read by copying and pasting into Word.
The reason given for the long delay and the approval process is that the Public Accounts Committee will not be confused by arguments over the facts. This is not borne out by the changes made to the original report which are now revealed to be simply about watering down any criticism. Claims that the government is learing from its mistakes are patently false.
The sort of corruption that brought us the dodgy dossiers over WMD is far more widspread than many believe. Our MP's whose job is to hold the government to account are clearly failing to do so. Perhaps the PAC should be renamed the Pathetic Accounts Committee.