Labour has been quick to announce a major shake-up of government’s digital operations. PublicTechnology editor Sam Trendall examines the issues that will shape the success – or otherwise – of its plans.
The teenage years are, for all of us, a period of major and lasting change.
As it approaches its 13th birthday, the Government Digital Service – alongside its sibling, the Central Digital and Data Office – is set for the biggest change of its life so far.
Having been based in the Cabinet Office since 2011, the digital units are to be moved to the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology – as is the Incubator for Artificial Intelligence which, having been founded less than a year ago, is very much the baby of the family.
The aim of the plan, announced by the new Labour DSIT secretary Peter Kyle earlier this week, is to bring together in one place all of its Whitehall’s digital expertise – including policy and delivery, and encompassing both government and the wider digital economy.
The decision could bring it with both potential plus points and pitfalls. But, more than anything, there are questions – that are largely yet to be answered. The process of doing so is likely to define the success – or otherwise – of the new administration’s bold plans.
Will they remain in their present form?
While they are operationally enclosed within the confines of the Cabinet Office, both GDS and CDDO exist and, largely, function as discrete entities. Each has its own management and distinct remit.
Labour has made clear its intent for DSIT to serve “as the digital centre of government”.
It remains to be seen whether this new centre of technical excellence will simply be comprised of existing building blocks, reconstructed into their previous form in a new location.
Perhaps the biggest question mark hangs over CDDO, which has only existed for three years having been, effectively, spun out of GDS. And, for what it’s worth, the organisation’s name – which suggests a ‘central’ location that it will no longer occupy – might be liable to prompt its new ministers and managers to consider a rebrand. If they are not already doing so, it seems likely that those in charge of DSIT will soon consider whether, going forward, their new colleagues and responsibilities would be best located in their current home, one or more new or rebranded organisations, or simply merged into the wider operations of the science and tech department.
What about spending controls?
Since its creation, a key function of GDS – and latterly CDDO – has been the oversight of centralised spend controls. The controls framework, and its enforcement, has enabled digital and data experts to run the rule over all departments’ proposed spending on tech implementation or new digital services. And, where necessary, to put its foot down and prevent investments lacking in technical sense or financial foresight.
In the early months and years of GDS, this function gave the fledgling digital unit – which might otherwise have been regarded as a collection of irksome upstarts in trainers and band t-shirts – some very useful leverage in trying to drive reform through the ancient and august departments of state. Various senior leaders of which felt the sharp end of what former Government Digital Service head Alison Pritchard once described to PublicTechnology as “a bit of the old GDS elbow”.
The tech unit may have long since sought to adopt a less disruptive and more collaborative approach, but the tech and digital spend controls – which were taken over by CDDO in 2021 – continue to provide an important process of checks and balances for government spending.
The issue is that other controls – in areas such as marketing, property, and consultancy – are all managed from the centre by various expert teams or units in the Cabinet Office.
If it is decentralised and decoupled from other spending checks, the tech approval process could prove to be harder to enforce.
To some extent, this may also be true of the array of other cross-government policies CDDO is currently charged with overseeing, including: technical standards for digital services and data; the guidance mapping out the roles that comprise the civil service digital and data profession; and the pay framework that enables departments to recruit and retain key staff by boosting their compensation packages.
Which ministers will be in the mix?
For the early years of GDS’s operation, it enjoyed an extended period of ministerial stability – and strength.
Francis Maude, who served as the Cabinet Office’s most senior minister, was not only invested in and supportive of the digital unit’s mission, but also had the ear of then prime minister David Cameron – to whom he was a key ally.
Following Maude’s departure from government in 2015, Whitehall tech watchers might have been tempted to create a drinking game based on instances of new faces taking the ministerial reins of the central digital agencies. And anyone who attempted to keep up with the pace would surely have ended up very, very worse for wear.
A couple of ministers – such as Matt Hancock and Oliver Dowden – spent a year or more in charge of GDS, and appeared to have some enthusiasm for its work, as well as a high-enough profile to bring it some political attention. But many more – many more – have held junior briefs, and only for a matter of months, weeks, or even days.
Whichever department provides a roof over the head of GDS and CDDO, a key determinant of the units’ success will be the seniority and strength of the minister who oversees their work.
The early signs are good in this regard. DSIT’s secretary of state, Peter Kyle, has been government’s primary spokesperson for the decision to move the digital functions to his department. Kyle was also included on a list of 40 parliamentary candidates endorsed before the election by the Labour Digital organisation as the party’s leading advocates of technology-powered transformation.
Other digital government supporters will surely be hoping that the new minister continues to provide hands-on support – and Cabinet-level representation – for DSIT’s new responsibilities.
What of the wider public sector?
Over the course of its nearly 13 years of operation, GDS has engaged with local government and the wider public sector – particularly through tools such as Pay and Notify. But extending or deepening this engagement to include far greater hands-on support and guidance tailored for public services beyond Whitehall is an ambition that has been frequently expressed by the digital unit’s leaders, but never realised to any great extent.
This has not stopped discussion about the merits of creating something akin to a ‘Local GDS’ – an idea which has some high-profile advocates. Such a body, presumably convened and supported by central government, could provide assistance to the hundreds of local authorities around the UK that, currently, often spend time, energy, and money that could have been saved by the awareness and use of common tools or standards.
In its announcement of the relocation of GDS and CDDO, government said that it wanted to “unite efforts in the digital transformation of public services”, and that a key practical objective will be to “help remove roadblocks to sharing data across the public sector”.
It added: “DSIT will become the partner and standard bearer for government departments as it supports them to use technology across areas like energy, health, policing, and education.”
These words suggest a wider role for GDS and CDDO but, for now, they are simply that: words. Once the units have completed the move to a new home, local authorities around the country may keep a close eye on the actions that follow.
Is east London still GDS’s manor?
It may seem like a more prosaic concern, but GDS and CDDO’s east London home has long been seen as a significant part of its identity. When GDS moved into the Whitechapel Building in 2016, it created some differentiation and distance – of about three miles – between the radical reform work being driven by the digital unit and the business-as-usual politicking of Westminster. No other government bodies are located at the E1 offices, which the digital teams share with the likes of tech recruiters, comms consultants, and charities.
East London is rightly recognised for its vibrancy and diversity. The area has become known as a hub for tech and innovation – but the wave of start-ups and cold-brew coffee has not washed away all social ills.
Tower Hamlets, the borough that houses the GDS and CDDO headquarters, has by some distance the UK’s highest levels of deprivation among older residents, according to the most recently available official statistics.
These surroundings are a far cry from the stuffed shirts and souvenir shops of Whitehall.
There is no suggestion as yet that DSIT will seek to relocate the digital units – which also employ staff in Bristol and Manchester – but it is possible that it may consider whether the integration of its new teams are best served by keeping them entirely separate – physically, at least – from their new colleagues, and the rest of government.
In addition to its joint HQs in London and Salford, DSIT has offices in Birmingham, Cardiff, Darlington and Edinburgh, and is also due to open a Bristol location later this year. Its existing workforce is expected to become less London-centric over the coming years. It remains to be seen whether this will be reflected among its 1,000 new tech-focused employees.
Best Private Proxies – 50 Low cost + No cost Proxies! Top notch excellent, Endless data transfer rate, 1000 mb/s superspeed, 99,9 uptime, Neo successive IP’s, No practice constraints, Various subnets, USA and also Europe proxies – Buy Right now – DreamProxies.com