News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on UK Treasury trying to find a Head of Cyber Security for £55k. Parent comment

Re:UK Treasury trying to find a Head of Cyber Security for £55k by nindalf on Sunday April 02, 2023 @07:35AM (#35409484)
I’ve had the misfortune to work with Accenture acting on behalf of the UK government. They’ve somehow managed to stretch a software project 2 years past delivery date, bleeding the UK taxpayer dry the whole time. At no point have these people shown even a shred of professionalism or competence.

All the while I’m not even sure the boffins at Whitehall even realise they’re being robbed blind. But to be fair, if it wasn’t Accenture robbing them, it’d be some other firm doing the same thing in the same way.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:UK Treasury trying to find a Head of Cyber Security for £55k by whatyesaid on Sunday April 02, 2023 @07:49AM (#35409571)
Reminds me of how the HealthCare.gov website cost 2.1 billion and yet had countless issues when it was launched.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:UK Treasury trying to find a Head of Cyber Security for £55k by candiodari on Sunday April 02, 2023 @10:07AM (#35410640)
But you don't realize the name of the game in government is to "reasonably sabotage" projects to safeguard the existence of your own position. The costs this leads to are absolutely amazing because you cannot do anything, ever, anywhere. In one position I was baffled, but contacting someone reporting to me ... took a week. And not because he was being hired or on vacation.

This is why the government uses outside contractors in the first place.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:UK Treasury trying to find a Head of Cyber Security for £55k by lazystar on Sunday April 02, 2023 @01:59PM (#35413292)
the beaurocracy problem.... created to solve a specific need of the people, but once staffed, the goal of the beaurocracy becomes ensuring that its budget increases year over year.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:UK Treasury trying to find a Head of Cyber Security for £55k by g-erson on Sunday April 02, 2023 @09:02AM (#35410073)
How often is it the case that some official in government has an interest in Accenture, or whatever company, and it is in their interest for that company to win contracts, and then simply stretch those contracts out as long as possible, while the interested official continues their influence in retaining the contract? Or perhaps I'm overly cynical.
[ Parent | on HN ]