retired_fabricodalacosta

To say this is a huge cockup is an understatement. Will more than do lasting damage to Brown's government. Their credibility (if they had any in the first place) may now be damaged beyond repair.

Politicians - gutless arseholes. :thdn:

Fitness Matt

It should be his responsibility and also that of his manager. </BLOCKQUOTE>

As HMR&C's IT is farmed out under PFI, and it could just as easily have been somebody in IT (and not actually in HMR&C) that collated the data and then made a ****-up of posting it, who's responsible then?

retired_yesmoncar

It should be his responsibility and also that of his manager. </BLOCKQUOTE>

As HMR&C's IT is farmed out under PFI, and it could just as easily have been somebody in IT (and not actually in HMR&C) that collated the data and then made a ****-up of posting it, who's responsible then? </BLOCKQUOTE>

Someone must have taken ownership of the task and getting the item to the Audit Office. Who took the ownership is key to who is at fault. If it's the Junior Official, it should be him and his manager, if it is his manager, then just the manager should be held responsible.

If it is an IT worker who has taken ownership then he is responsible.

retired_jkrausse

Everyone throughout the chain of command bears some responsibility FFS

Someone put a policy in place regarding transfer of sensitive data
Someone either didn't know the policy, ignored the policy or worse followed the policy leading to this potential catastrophe

Somebody else would have reviewed and approved said policy

And those at senior levels including ministers are paid an large sum of money and perks to hold responsibility for the running of the department

They therefore have to bear the blame for this mess, at least the Head of the department had the sense of decency to do the right thing

Fitness Matt

While a junior offical might have had the job of posting the disc, there is absolutely no way that they would have had access to the data in such a way as to be able to put it on a disc. I don't have the capability of getting data like that and I'm a few grades up from the post room. To me, the greater responsibility lies with whomever it was who had the access to the data and therefore it was their job to make sure proper procedures were followed in the transit of the data.

However, it doesn't help that 'efficiency savings' have not only reduced the number of people within the Department, causing chaos and uncertainty as to roles and responsibilities, but even down to the fact that a diktat went round the whole department saying that post had to go second class as standard unless authorised by a certain level of management. (Probably after having to put in a 'business case' for it...)

Fitness Matt

Oh, and ever since the old C&E did away with the weekly Bulletin to save money, the communication of policy, law changes, new etc. within the Department has been shocking. By cascaded e-mails usually, and then in indecipherable jargon most of the time.

retired_kevh16

Apparently it was sent contrary to the policy regarding transfer of this sort of stuff.

Doesn't absolve higher management from blame though. The controls in place obviously weren't strong enough.

retired_yesmoncar

While a junior offical might have had the job of posting the disc, there is absolutely no way that they would have had access to the data in such a way as to be able to put it on a disc. I don't have the capability of getting data like that and I'm a few grades up from the post room. To me, the greater responsibility lies with whomever it was who had the access to the data and therefore it was their job to make sure proper procedures were followed in the transit of the data.

However, it doesn't help that 'efficiency savings' have not only reduced the number of people within the Department, causing chaos and uncertainty as to roles and responsibilities, but even down to the fact that a diktat went round the whole department saying that post had to go second class as standard unless authorised by a certain level of management. (Probably after having to put in a 'business case' for it...) </BLOCKQUOTE>

IT Worker A gives important data to Manager B and lets him know it is hugely important. Manager B gives it to pe0n C and tells him to send it.

A is at fault?

retired_ranjanabhat

I thought it was £20 a week up until the age of one then £10 thereafter?

Might be different in Scotland though

Fitness Matt

While a junior offical might have had the job of posting the disc, there is absolutely no way that they would have had access to the data in such a way as to be able to put it on a disc. I don't have the capability of getting data like that and I'm a few grades up from the post room. To me, the greater responsibility lies with whomever it was who had the access to the data and therefore it was their job to make sure proper procedures were followed in the transit of the data.

However, it doesn't help that 'efficiency savings' have not only reduced the number of people within the Department, causing chaos and uncertainty as to roles and responsibilities, but even down to the fact that a diktat went round the whole department saying that post had to go second class as standard unless authorised by a certain level of management. (Probably after having to put in a 'business case' for it...) </BLOCKQUOTE>

IT Worker A gives important data to Manager B and lets him know it is hugely important. Manager B gives it to pe0n C and tells him to send it.

A is at fault? </BLOCKQUOTE>

It could have been that B was told to get the data sent to the Audit Office, and they gave job to A who posted it on without knowing the posting policy.

Or it could have been lots of different scenarios. No good apportioning blame without knowing the whole story first. All I'm saying is that it doesn't surprise me in the slightest that something like this has happened.