Leader: Where's the value in e-government?

Assuming investments in IT at local government have their intended effect of doing something faster, to a higher standard or more cheaply - come on, no sniggers at the back there, we're talking local government rather than central government project failure - how would you like to see savings reinvested?

It's a big question. As citizens, most of us would like to see taxes lower. We'd also quite like to see better quality services. Or services delivered in a shorter timeframe. Trouble is, rarely are all three possible at the same time, no matter what some people might promise.

At a local government forum today, representatives of several local authorities and the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister spoke a lot about the reasons for the big e-government push.

Most agreed going electronic wasn't just a case of being told they had to - though a deadline always helps with motivation - but about advancing service provision.

But, with skilled administrators now focused on running authorities like private businesses - with similar or often higher budgets and employee numbers only with that tricky obligation to serve everyone - is it any wonder they are looking for value in investments such as IT? And let us not forget many such council chiefs and their staff nowadays do have plenty of commercial experience.

When a council spends, say, five per cent of its expenditure on IT, should it expect overall efficiency gains of five per cent, 10 per cent or more? The prevailing mood seems to be it should. Whether that money is reinvested in IT or other services or given back in the form of lower taxes is another matter.

How about if costs stay the same but services are drastically improved? Today, this publication heard an interesting example. We heard how conveyancing - which typically takes weeks for what appears to be quite a simple process (lawyers, don't you just love them?) - can be speeded up with the National Land Information Service available electronically.

A return on investment for that IT spend is hard to qualify back in government. But it's a real return. Could we be looking too hard at the bottom line?