[foundation-board] Situation with data.gov.uk CKAN work

Mon Jul 26 08:24:33 UTC 2010

See email below for detailed statement of situation from gov end. Note
also explicit commitment to pay all outstanding amounts.

I should also say we have just received payment of an additional £32k
which at least brings up to mid-February (and means, I believe, that
we are able to cover all existing obligations to contractors up to the
present). We are working to get paid for last 5 months asap but it is
partly held up on different parts of gov paying each other (BTW: this
money cannot be touched by things like the spending review since these
are monies agreed and committed 8 months ago -- just not transferred
between relevant parties as yet).

My advice to the board at this stage is that we should continue to
work on the data.gov.uk project while continuing to push extremely
hard for full and prompt payment of *all* outstanding monies.

Rufus

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sheridan, John <John.Sheridan at nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk>
Date: 12 July 2010 10:38
Subject: RE: Summary of phone conversations [UNCLASSIFIED]
To: "rufus.pollock at okfn.org" <rufus.pollock at okfn.org>
Cc: "Lait, Claire" <Claire.Lait at nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk>, John
Sheridan <johnlsheridan at yahoo.com>

Rufus,

I understand the situation - I can only apologise, you are at the
wrong end of a long chain. I am trying to make this work - it is not a
comfortable situation for you or me.

Up to now, the arrangements have been informal - and everyone agrees
this can't continue. This email is confirming the arrangements for
paying OKF for work being undertaken on CKAN for data.gov.uk.

To clarify the overall process, The National Archives is being paid by
the Cabinet Office for various strands of work on data.gov.uk, which
in turn is being funded by the Department of Innovation and Skills. We
have reached an agreement with our contractor, TSO, that they will pay
you as a sub-contractor to them for the work you have been doing. Like
everyone supplying government, they are nervous at the moment so they
will only pay you once they have received purchase orders from us.

TNA is in the process of reaching a formal agreement with the Cabinet
Office (there is a meeting this week at Chief Executive level, so
that's my bosses boss!), to agree the total budget for the year, with
a memorandum of understanding between the two organisations (TNA and
CO) to cover the whole period through to end of 2010/11.

Meanwhile I am working on reaching a more formal understanding with
TSO, on exactly what the scope is of the work they can deliver for us
under the terms of our existing contract with them (which covers an
Information Asset Register and a clause for development, thus bringing
CKAN development into scope of that contract - but there are other
elements and we are still in negotiation about some of that). That
situation is complicated in that we have not raised purchase orders to
TSO for the work they have been doing themselves for data.gov.uk.
Understandably, they expect their own bills to be covered before
paying anyone else.

Finally, we have been told not to raise any purchase orders until all
the formal agreements are in place - hence the apparent impasse.

The process is:
1.  TNA finalises it plans / proposals to CO for all elements of our
delivery for data.gov.uk
2.  TNA - CO reach agreement on the budget for the financial year, on
all strands of data.gov.uk delivery by TNA.
3.  POs raised to TSO, to cover OKF costs (and also, to cover TSO's
costs to date, which is more than we owe you)
4.  Payment to OFK by TSO

You have shared with me a spreadsheet (on google groups),  outlining
your costs to date, that constitutes the amounts of money due to be
paid to OKF. We have discussed this spreadsheet and I can confirm our
intention to raise POs to our contractor for this work, and that it is
my understanding that you will be operating as a subcontractor to
them.

Things are moving forwards - I know it is agonisingly slow and
difficult. I can only apologise again for the distress and concern
this must be causing you.

We are nearly there though!

John.

-----Original Message-----
From: okfn.rufus.pollock at gmail.com
[mailto:okfn.rufus.pollock at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Rufus Pollock
Sent: 12 July 2010 10:04
To: Sheridan, John
Cc: Lait, Claire; John Sheridan
Subject: Summary of phone conversations

Dear John,

Really sorry to hassle like this but I *really* need an update on what
is happening. Last wednesday we spoke in the morning on the phone and
you told things would be sorted by end of last week (or very latest
today) and that you would send me an email to confirm this. I don't
think I've received any email as yet :)

Back in June we agreed everything would be resolved by *end of June*
(I enclose summary email from that conversation below). As you can
imagine I am under a lot of pressure at my end from the Board to get
this resolved. Please, please let me know what is happening and who I
can invoice.

As I just explained to Claire if I do not hear from you very soon I
think I shall need to invoice you/TSO right now with the outstanding
invoices just to make sure everyone is aware of the outstanding
payments due.

Rufus

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Rufus Pollock <rufus.pollock at okfn.org>
Date: 17 June 2010 13:55
Subject: Summary of conversation re invoice payment
To: "Sheridan, John" <John.Sheridan at nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk>
Cc: "Lait, Claire" <claire.lait at nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk>, John
Sheridan <johnlsheridan at yahoo.com>

1. Here is an updated version of existing payments situation
spreadsheet (also just shared with you both now):

<https://spreadsheets1.google.com/ccc?key=t_4tH0S6toPu_YYlIbiR_BA&hl=en#gid=0>

2. JS agreed that monies will be paid (no problem here other than
administrative).
 * ACTION: JS to response acknowledging this!

3. Existing raised invoices to be paid by end of June (35k being
36.47k with VAT).

4. Remaining not yet invoiced money to be able to invoiced by end of June.

5. RP suggest we think about putting in place a new agreement between
OKF and TNA (or CO or whoever) for ongoing work.

Rufus
--
Open Knowledge Foundation
Promoting Open Knowledge in a Digital Age http://www.okfn.org/ -
http://blog.okfn.org/

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the
Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by
Cable&Wireless Worldwide in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM
Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call
your organisation’s IT Helpdesk.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored
and/or recorded for legal purposes.

Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

National Archives Disclaimer

This email message (and attachments) may contain information that is
confidential to The National Archives. If you are not the intended
recipient you cannot use, distribute or copy the message
or attachments. In such a case, please notify the sender by return
email immediately and erase all copies of the message and attachments.
Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message
and attachments that do not relate to the official business of The
National Archives are neither given nor endorsed by it.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
Open Knowledge Foundation
Promoting Open Knowledge in a Digital Age
http://www.okfn.org/ - http://blog.okfn.org/