UK government gifts new £250m hosting contract to its own joint venture
- Reference: 1644493991
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2022/02/10/uk_gov_to_gift_new/
- Source link:
The rationale is that Ark is the only supplier judged to be capable of meeting the necessary security requirements.
Crown Hosting Data Centres (CHDC) is a joint venture between the Cabinet Office, which owns 25 per cent, and Ark Data Centres Ltd, which owns the rest. It was [2]set up in 2015 for the express purpose of providing hosting services for the government.
[3]
Under a voluntary ex ante transparency notice (VEAT), the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) [4]posted details of the Crown Hosting II procurement, which is for rental of managed premises and provision of associated products and services for the ICT of its public-sector customers.
[5]
[6]
This is the second extension to the [7]original Crown Hosting contract , which was extended for another four years in 2018. Crown Hosting II is to last for seven years, and the proposed start date is scheduled to be on or around 15 March 2023, with the estimated value for the whole contract listed as £250m.
The VEAT reveals that the CCS has reviewed its requirements for this framework and concluded that a direct award to the supplier is permissible because this supplier is the only one capable of meeting the high security classification requirements and support services critical to the national interest.
[8]
This kind of direct award is allowed under regulation 32(2)(b)(ii) of the [9]PCR 2015 , which permits the contract to be awarded without prior publication where competition is absent for technical reasons.
According to the CCS, the security aspect is important in this case as a result of the UK government's [10]Cloud First Policy , which directs public-sector customers to [11]migrate workloads away from data centres and instead favour public cloud services.
Although this is often easier said than done, the CCS states that the net effect of the Cloud First policy is an overall shrinking of potential data centre business from public-sector bodies, so that a greater proportion of the remaining data centre requirements are those that are critical to the national interest or have higher security classifications.
[12]
In other words, the workloads to be hosted under this contract are likely to be those requiring the highest level of physical, operational and electronic security requirements.
[13]Sovereignty? We've heard of it. UK government gives contract to store MI5, MI6 and GCHQ's data to AWS
[14]Ark scoops £700m to host ALL UK.gov's data centre needs
[15]UK government's cloud spending hits saturation: Love of Microsoft endures
[16]UK govt's top tech heavyweight Maxwell quits for Amazon job
[17]UK government stacks up to £1.8bn in vertical application framework
CCS also stated that the seven-year framework is justifiable as this will provide ample time for the end user in question to begin and complete their four-year relocation programmes within the timeframe. The alternative of the more common four-year framework agreement, as with the previous two Crown Hosting contracts, would likely prove insufficient for a large data centre relocation programme to start and finish before the framework agreement ended.
While it is easy to be cynical about the government awarding contracts to organisations in which it has an interest, in this case it appears that the national security argument is a valid one, especially when taken with other requirements such as for highly secure premises across at least three locations separated by no less than 15km.
However, we also note that AWS was reportedly given a contract to [18]store data for MI5, MI6 and GCHQ last year.
In its financial statement for the [19]year ended 30 June 2021 [PDF], CHDC reported a turnover of nearly £46m, with profit after tax of nearly £2.5m. This was up on £43m turnover and £2m profit the previous year. ®
Get our [20]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.find-tender.service.gov.uk/Notice/003201-2022
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2015/03/12/ark_bags_700m_gov_data_centre_deal_sources/
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2YgVEvpR4ci7iV-AJ3UdytAAAAJc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[4] https://bidstats.uk/tenders/2022/W05/768147957
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YgVEvpR4ci7iV-AJ3UdytAAAAJc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33YgVEvpR4ci7iV-AJ3UdytAAAAJc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2015/03/12/ark_bags_700m_gov_data_centre_deal_sources/
[8] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YgVEvpR4ci7iV-AJ3UdytAAAAJc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[9] https://pcr2015.uk/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2013/05/08/gcloud_mandate/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2021/02/23/uk_health_department_cloud_it/
[12] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33YgVEvpR4ci7iV-AJ3UdytAAAAJc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2021/10/26/uk_security_services_aws/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2015/03/12/ark_bags_700m_gov_data_centre_deal_sources/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2018/05/10/uk_gov_cloud_spending_growth_slows/
[16] https://www.theregister.com/2018/08/07/liam_maxwell_tech_adviser_leaves_ukgov_for_amazon/
[17] https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/06/uk_government_stacks_up_to/
[18] https://www.theregister.com/2021/10/26/uk_security_services_aws/
[19] https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09274699/filing-history/MzMxNDkwNTQ5M2FkaXF6a2N4/document?format=pdf&download=0
[20] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Do I understand correctly
If only.
It seems as if they only own a quarter of it anyway. If they were serious about meeting their security requirements they'd own all of it.
Re: Do I understand correctly
What the article says is that as a result of the overall policy of "cloud first" a larger proportion of the workloads which will remain in the data centre will be "sensitive". That "sensitivity" they say, justifies the award to this supplier as uniquely qualified from a security perspective. Add your own dose of salt to taste ;-)
Crown Jewels or Dirty Deeds ?
Can you imagine the sort of info and intel a RAT would discover with a sweet crack and sublime hack into any of those data centres ‽ .
Re: Crown Jewels or Dirty Deeds ?
I've just been rewatching Mr Robot so yesssssss I can :D
Brilliant !
Government creates for-profit enterprise to supply government, then decides that it can bestow contract on it without public tender.
No way anything can possibly go wrong with that.
Next you'll be telling me that there are absolutely zero MPs or parliament officials involved on either side of this deal.
Is Dido Harding lurking anywhere near ?
Even Brillianter .... although it might not be strictly kosher !
Government creates for-profit enterprise to supply government, then decides that it can bestow contract on it without public tender in order to extract tens/tons of millions at their leisure for their pleasures.
Is that too cynical to be true and unlikely? Or a good plan if being followed by a blind man on a galloping wild horse? Parliament has proven form for not abiding by rules and the norm.
Whenever the core is rotten and effective leadership is missing, all manner of strange and incriminating shenanigans all of a sudden start to appear from the shadows to be questioned in the white heat light of the day and another suspect 0day.
This makes sense in so many ways
A Wiltshire based company so easier to do a security audit & keep on so.
Based in the UK, so out of reach of things like the USA patriot act, increase UK based skills.
A joint venture: good for audit and stop bleeding profits overseas.
UK government gifts new £250m hosting contract to its own joint venture
What's wrong with the word "gives"?
Do I understand correctly
They want to move from data centres to "cloud"
But "cloud" doesn't meet their security requirements
So they build their own data centre, call it a cloud, and move it to that.