Terms & Conditions

[Julian Hobson]

Sorry if this isn’t your thing but perhaps someone in your LA should know and be able to reply.

On the 18th august LA’s received a letter from government Connect confirming that unless an LA will have access to GCSX at 31 march 2009 they will lose CIS access (no ETD’s no CIS) UNLESS they obtain an exemption by submitting a request to the Exemption Committee by 30th September 2008. In any event the exemption (if awarded) will only run to 30th September 2009 at which point any non compliant LA will lose Cis access.

I’m interested to know how many of you will be seeking exemptions and on what grounds.

I’m told that access to gcsx by home/mobile workers is an issue because the code of compliance requires two levels of authentication for users, possibly a smart card and password. The problem is that ALL home/mobile workers in an LA would require it regardless of whether they use CIS eg building inspectors, highways staff, social workers etc. This can be very costly.

[Anonymous]

We are having to seek an exemption because we will not be ready in time. I gather there is a list of stringent conditions we have to meet and I have also heard that only a handful of Authorities nationally are likely to be compliant in time.
Is anyone here using it?

[david kearney]

We have applied for an exemption (on the grounds that we will not be able ready by April) but have not had a response from the Govt Connect team as yet.

As far as we are concerned we have done what we can and will be looking to go live with it shortly after April 2009. I would be interested in how many LA’s have just ignored the letter though, and whether DWP are actually serious about removing CIS access or just blustering. They will have to prepare for an massive increase in LA telephone enquries if they are.

regards

[fran]

We have requested an exemption. The required hardware set up will cost us and we do not have the money in this years budget.

[david kearney]

Has anyone actually had a request for exemption granted?, and if so what were the reasons the exemption was requested.

[david kearney]

For info, we have just been advised that an exemption has been granted.

[Rob Hawes1]

We’ve also had an exemption granted until 31/7/09. The letter’s not very specific about the reasons for the exemption but we have been thanked for ‘demonstrating our clear and unambiguous commitment’ and complying with process requirements. So, without wishing to be cynical or in any way denigrating the work that IT have put in so far, maybe Gov Connect just need to be satisfied that you’re trying hard to comply in order to grant an exemption.

[david kearney]

funnily enough we were also thanked for ‘demonstrating our clear and unambiguous commitment’ Grateful it’s been granted, but I remain curious as to what the take up has been, and whether the threatened sanctions will be imposed on the non-compliers.

[Rob Hawes1]

In response to David’s previous post, at the Pension Service liaison meeting in London last week Pension service, DWP reps and Frank Newton from the LGA were emphatic that no GCSX or exemption would mean no access to CIS from April 2009. They were quite definite about it.

Anybody who isn’t taking this seriously really ought to kick up a fuss with their senior management and IT sections because it won’t just be HB/CTB that will be affected, although that’ll be the most obvious immediate impact. They’re saying that lack of GCSX will prevent an LA having any contact with government (although cynics might say that that would be a blessed relief).

[Author]

Posts