- AAP (CIO)
- 30 May, 2013 14:32
Thursday, June 06, 2013
Now It Seems All We Have To Wait For Is For Blame To Be Apportioned and The Legal Action To Start.
The Qld Health Payroll Enquiry has finished its hearings.
There has been some amazing coverage.
This was one I especially found interesting:
When asked if he knew whether his department had one of the most complex payroll requirements in the government, Lucas said he did not
Queensland's former health minister says he was unaware how complex the department's payroll requirements were when he was considering an automated system that ultimately failed.
Lucas, also the former deputy premier, has been cross-examined by Queensland's health payroll inquiry on Thursday over the state's most costly IT fiasco.
It resulted in thousands of pay errors under his watch and is expected to end up costing taxpayers $1.2 billion.
He told the inquiry the health department wanted an automated payroll system to replace the ageing "Lattice" program.
He said a lot of data had to be entered manually by payroll staff.
"In retrospect the complexity of the system I think made it incredibly difficult to go to some super system from what was a very benign and forgiving way Lattice operated," he said.
You really would have thought the Minister’s advisors would have known just how complex these systems are especially in complex bureaucracies like Health.
This was also interesting:
Date May 27, 2013 - 4:22PM
The impacts on the state's health workers outweighed any possible gain from suing IT contractor IBM over the payroll system, former Premier Anna Bligh said.
Ms Bligh, appearing at the final stage of the Health Payroll System Commission of Inquiry, said she had considered suing IBM, but ultimately decided, at the time, it was not worth the loss of "goodwill" and what that could mean fixing the system.
Under questioning from Counsel Assisting Peter Flanagan SC, Ms Bligh said she made a "judgment call" not to launch legal action based on the advice and material provided to her at the time.
She said she was "primarily and constantly motivated by trying to fix this system".
"I put the practical considerations above the legal considerations when I made this decision, I believed sincerely that that was the right thing to do, I appreciate there might be other legal finer points that were sacrificed in that process," Ms Bligh said.
"But there was also a great sense of urgency. It might look on the documents as we look at them in hindsight that there were five weeks or seven weeks between these sorts of events, but when that is three or four pay packets that have failed you yet again, that's a very long time for people who every pay day have to go and make other arrangements.
"And when you say it is stabilising, you [Mr Flanagan] are right, but it was stabilising with considerable manual intervention that was unsustainable in the long term and we needed all of our partners with a lot of good will to be sitting hand in glove with us."
Commissioner Richard Chesterman asked Ms Bligh to clarify her position.
"What you are saying Ms Bligh, that regardless of the value of the state's rights, no matter how large they were, or how valuable they were, you'd have taken the same course?"
Ms Bligh answered: "If I had the same advice about the risk that this could significantly delay or see a serious breakdown between the technical support from IBM and related subcontractors that would have put the system at further risk, yes I believe I would have made the same decision."
Ms Bligh was premier when the state contracted out its health payroll system.
Lots more here:
This really has been quite a saga. The final report, which is due out in a few months, will be compulsory reading.
Posted by Dr David G More MB PhD at Thursday, June 06, 2013