Government faces battle to drive open source procurement
/v3-uk/news/2106753/government-battle-drive-source-procurement
05 Sep 2011, Dan Worth , V3
The government faces a tough battle to meet its commitment to using open source software after a Freedom of Information request by the BBC revealed how much Whitehall spends with large vendors.
The data shows that most departments spend the majority of their IT budgets on software from large vendors rather than exploring alternatives, specifically open source vendors, which could offer huge savings.
For example, the Department for Work and Pensions spent £614,860 with Oracle, £92,125 with Microsoft and £433,077 with IBM in the past 12 months.
Meanwhile, the Home Office spent a whopping £21m of its £26m budget with defence technology firm Raytheon Systems for 'IT, broadcasting and telecoms software' and £514,561 with HP.
The Department for Culture, Media and Sport spent £17,073 with RSA Security, £47,401 with Clearswift for email appliances and over £28,000 with Symantec for security products.
More information can be seen in Google documents that outline each department's spend, although the level of detail for each department varies based on the information provided.
The government has said on several occasions that it intends to push the use of open source as part of a drive to break its reliance on large vendors and reduce costs, but it appears to have a difficult task on its hands.
James Peel, product manager at open source firm Opsview, suggested that the figures underline the difficulty in changing the mindset around IT procurement, but urged Whitehall to oversee a change in buying strategy.
"There is a stigma around open source software, but there shouldn't be. The reality is it's just software - some of it good, some of it bad. The key is to evaluate the technology before signing up, just as you would any piece of software," he said.
"The problem is that too many people think the best software is the most expensive software. As a result they end up wasting money on expensive proprietary technology."
© Incisive Media Investments Limited 2010, Published by Incisive Financial Publishing Limited, Haymarket House, 28-29 Haymarket, London SW1Y 4RX, are companies registered in England and Wales with company registration numbers 04252091 & 04252093
Do you agree?
Open Source
Between a rock and a hard place - Departments are tied into what they can use because of security. Only those that are on the the approved lists can be used - simple as. The more the Government centralise the more that plays into the larger providers hands.
Posted by Ian, 06 Sep 2011
Other, long-term advantages to Open Source
I fully agree with the argument that James puts forward, the quality of the software is what is important, not it's license. Many of our customers build systems that simply cannot fail and are unconcerned whether the tools they use come with an open or closed licence. They just want them to work and to work well.
There are, however, more and more that understand that using open source tools can bring advantages that can be less-obvious, yet perhaps more important, than the cost argument. No tie-in through locks means that we must innovative our technology and provide the highest levels of support service. Customers see the benefit through a richer toolset and levels of support that are unrivaled in our niche market. Participation in numerous open source research projects where we benefit from the mutualization of ideas and experience to help build tools and processes ultimately helps our customers. Many have realised this and are now taking advantage of community-development themselves by leading open source projects. This allows them to concentrate on the areas where they truly bring added value and this argument is convincing at all levels of the management tree.
Posted by jamie, 08 Sep 2011