regarding ‘Gary Wilson – Obviously hadn’t worked on the NHS-IT project otherwise he’d have referred to it by its name rather than “NHS Supercomputer” which is a term that I’ve never heard in the context of NHS-IT’

I was using the term much used in the media, to refer to it in a way understandable by idiots like yourself. After 3.5years on the project, the use of ‘NPfIT’ and hundreds of other crazy terms, ‘Connecting for Health’, ‘CfH’, ‘National Spine’, ‘National Programme for IT’ etc, etc, its inner workings, its enterprise architecture, data, logical, physical together with its requirements capture and realisation through use cases became well known and very well understand. Keep on bean counting, but leave the IT commentary to the real IT professionals, amongst which my many years hard gained experience and grey hair qualifies me as a member!

You whine about crowdsourcing, the subject is the G-Cloud IT project! Stick to the point man!

I do hope someone at HQ is considering pulling it. It’s going to get more embarrassing as each day passes.

The problem with this approach is that you have no way of telling my expertise, my agenda or my political affiliation from my comments and you have the same problem with the other commenters.

For example –

Martin Coxhall – doubtless very passionate, but uses words he clearly doesn’t understand (Actually Martin – there’s a lot of semantic content in the diagram)

Robert – is a complete nutter who would seem to want to roll us all back to the days of Florence Nightingale

Gary Wilson – Obviously hadn’t worked on the NHS-IT project otherwise he’d have referred to it by its name rather than “NHS Supercomputer” which is a term that I’ve never heard in the context of NHS-IT

This is absolutely the worst scenario for croud-sourcing, and I sincerely hope that rather than relying on the input from a collection of madwags, the conservative party will actually engage with people who know what they’re talking about.

What you still need to sort out is treating personal data with the respect it deserves, respecting the fact that it’s valuable, and it’s ours not yours.

Forget all this sucking up to senior officials **What about restoring *public* confidence?

The medical record system is a sham, where for instance is the indexing and what data types are being crossed referenced ?

As, far as I can ascertain, there is virtually no point in providing patient details across the intranet or internet for if the people who are going to be ‘ignoring’ the data held in the notes there is little point.
For, the medical profession, is a closed shop and scant attention is paid to any of the notes that exist on file anyway. Medical professionals opinion, however un-quantified would appear to override any data present on the patient notes. The NHS computer development is, a white elephant.

The medical profession requires, two things. 1) Brain power. 2) Disinfectant.

The medical profession also requires a detachment from statistics and being statistic driven.

The medical profession requires a management structure that is derived from the top echelon of medical teams. The current management processes have no grounding in medical science and that has a knock on effect all the way down to the ward. Where Science is considered to be, old hat.

The NHS does not require computing.

The NHS has never required computing, ever. Computing systems have been thrust upon the NHS by nitwits who, want to make a fast buck.

The medical profession, requires people, not more monkeys that operate ‘Government cloud, pie in the sky twaddle’. How, about spending a 100 million pounds on cleaners and a few new scalpels.

With regards, to other public services, pull it.

The public, do not need computing.

The report sites, websites such as Tesco and Amazon, probably the most boring and unenlightened sites on the web.

If the Government wants ‘bang for buck’, invest in people.

How about just keeping it simple, and commit to providing one elementary and much necessary service, only one – that of secure data, once done, all else can be built ontop. Until that’s provided, readers are bound to be sceptics. Can’t you just see the strategic directorate malware language throughout the website, massively impressive to the average reader no doubt. Ooooooo, how can we fail to understand that our government really has nailed this strategy, it’s in the bag! Please!

Personally, in the next 5 years, i’m committed to microwaving my iPhone, burying my laptops, removal of my personal details from any gov’t computer, and going to live in the Scottish hills in my tent – my personal data, namely how many naturally available berries and fruits i might find to survive will remain in my head, won’t be shared, or placed on any ‘wall’, not disseminated, nor indexed!

Remember the super-computer in the film ‘AI’, ‘where can i find the blue fairy?’ the boy asked, and the entire world’s data records were searched – everything ever recorded – at least at that point in our future, the boy will then know the people in the hills over Glencoe descended from the great Wilson.

Also where is the data management strategy as opposed to the data centre strategy, or do we really think that the government has got their data handling right? Security and resilience are also notable by their absence.

I have tried to discern some actual meaning, but I think a well-meaning sub-ed should have scratched the entire page.

Also: “The boundaries between public sector, third sector and private sector service provision are becoming increasingly blurred.”

is (a) untrue, and (b) should remain untrue.