From Computer Weekly{For educational purposes only}

Link requires free registration

Utilities set to keep year 2000 audits in the dark Bill Goodwin

Industry regulators will not be asked to publish independent audits of the year 2000 programmes for key gas, electricity and water suppliers, despite demands for greater openness from companies preparing contingency plans.

Action 2000 said last week that, although it would press regulators to disclose details of the readiness of individual suppliers, it would ask for only an indication of whether they are blue, red or amber on the watchdog's "traffic light" scale of readiness.

"If the statutory regulator of a particular sector says a company is blue, that should be sufficient," said Don Cruickshank, Action 2000 chairman.

Although most regulators have carried out independent audits of key parts of the infrastructure, Cruickshank confirmed he would not be pressing for their publication.

His comments follow complaints from the industry-sponsored pressure group Taskforce 2000 and the National Computer Centre that the traffic light assessments do not give companies the information they need to plan for possible disruptions.

"The unfortunate effect is that you are forced simply to believe or disbelieve the assessments: there is insufficient information for an informed discussion," said Robin Guenier, executive director of Taskforce 2000.

Claire Humphry, supply chain manager at mobile phone company Vodafone, said she would prefer the electricity regulator, Offer, to publish more in-depth information to accompany its pie chart analysis of each electricity company's readiness. "It is difficult to see from the pie charts how reliable their information is," she said.

However, the company said it had obtained the necessary contingency information through briefings with Offer officials. It has received assurances that, even in the event of a breakdown of the national grid (a "black start"), supply could be restored within two or three days.

Cruickshank said some regulators, such as Offer were planning to release more information, and he would press for greater disclosure in areas without statutory regulators. But he stressed that Action 2000 has no powers to order publication.

Medium-sized companies are struggling with testing embedded systems, the readiness of their supply chains and contingency planning, Action 2000 has claimed. According to its latest survey of 1,800 organisations, more than half of small companies and a quarter of firms employing more than 250 people have not yet considered contingency planning.

Catch up with all the latest Y2K issues in Millennium.

Maybe you have a burning issue that you want to share. Go visit a Forum

-- Mike Lang (webflier@erols.com), May 13, 1999

Answers

Blue means go? Like the old saying goes, we share so much with the English, sometimes it seems we're only separated by language.

-- Puddintame (achillesg@hotmail.com), May 13, 1999.

Would anybody really want to raise a "red light" claiming "We are behind and won't make it..."....willingly?

They don't get it - details are reassuring, in this case. Fog and confusion creates and increases the panic they fear so much.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), May 13, 1999.

Puddintame,

Blue is the colour for go on the brit traffic lights (you guys have green).

Simple! :)

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), May 14, 1999.

Andy,

Aren't you the poster who states that he is an ex-pat Englishman ? (see below) . .

[snip]

Uh, I do and I'm a Brit. Right wing? I don't even vote. Why so anngry at this information @@@@@@@???

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), May 10, 1999.

[end snip]

If I'm mistaking you for someone else, or this is a spoof-posting, then I apologise right here and you can skip the rest of this post. If not, I have to correct you, and then ask an obvious question.

First the correction.

THE "GO" COLOUR ON BRITISH TRAFFIC LIGHTS IS NOW AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN GREEN. BLUE HAS NEVER FEATURED ON BRITISH TRAFFIC LIGHTS.

The only variances that I'm aware of between our system and those of other countries is either . .

1. That we utilise amber between red and green, whereas some countries make the transition from one to the other directly.

or

2. The change sequence between our system and those of other countries also utilising the red, amber, green system. (Our sequence being Red, red and amber, green, amber, red.)

Now the obvious question.

Assuming that I'm not mistaken and you are the poster who's an expat english IT guy working in the USA . . WHY are you posting incorrect and misleading information of this kind ? A mistake ? You forgot ? (you forgot the colour of traffic lights in the country of your birth ?), or maybe humour ? (If so, I don't get it).

It may not be a big deal, it's just a conversation about traffic lights, but if one knowingly misleads about the little things, how can one expect to be trusted when one talks about the big ones ?

Maybe you'd like to clarify.

W0lv3r1n3 London, England.

PS - I'm also wondering why OldGit (another ex-pat I think) didn't correct you, but I'm assuming I got to your post before they did.

-- W0lv3r1n3 (W0lv3r1n3@yahoo.com), May 14, 1999.

Maybe Blue was chosen to symbolise Clear Water ahead ???

-- Chris (griffen@globalnet.co.uk), May 14, 1999.

Somebody's having a laugh - peedog???

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), May 14, 1999.