The Scottish Government’s stock answer of evolving requirements to explain why they allowed their Delivery Director to replace seasoned highly skilled IT contractors with Indian migrants was branded today as “ridiculous” by people linked to the project.
“The simple fact is that the Delivery Director went from making no personal money at all out of the staff working on the project to taking a daily cut of the monies paid to every worker he replaced them with.”
This was clearly about personal gain and nothing to do with evolving skill requirements as explained by the Scottish Government and is evident by his 4000% increase in annual turnover declared to companies house earlier this year from £80k to £3.5million.
Indeed, technical experts have confirmed that the skills required for the project are highly specific and will not change at all – although “there are better, more effective, and cheaper ways to develop and deliver this system.”
That this replacement of staff was not about evolving requirements was reinforced by the job adverts placed by the Delivery Director through his own agency which sought people with skills that exactly mirrored those of people already on the project.
It appears that a number of people replaced by Scottish Government were replaced because they had raised concerns about the CAP system and had criticised the technology stack as being “over-engineered”, “convoluted” and “doomed to failure from the outset” and had reported this to senior management at Scottish Government shortly before being replaced.
The migrant workers who replaced them were described as “under qualified yes men” by people on the project, “who did exactly as they were told without raising any issues for fear of being sent home.”
Indeed, the culture at Scottish Government became one of “fear and reprisal”.
References made by Scottish Government to “experienced Scottish Government staff” bringing migrant workers up to speed have also been slammed as “fictitious” with experienced Scottish Government staff instead complaining that they were left sidelined and isolated by the Scottish Government management.
“The simple fact is,” one person told us, “the senior management sabotaged their own project with these actions and some made themselves an awful lot of money out of the public purse by doing so.”
“It is interesting to note that the Scottish Government has made no attempts to claw back any of the money paid to the Delivery Director for this increasingly expensive failure.”