Its to do with their computer system that doesn't work properly and loses peoples tax returns, in my book thats unforgiveable. But proves their computer system has been designed by incompetent clowns, who probably got paid many millions of pounds.
In reverse order - yes, possibly, maybe !
As I work in IT, but not on that scale, I can say that it's incredibly hard, and eye-wateringly expensive to make a system that is "nearly" 100% fail-proof. 100% isn't possible, so in safety critical situations (aircraft flight controls, nuclear reactor controls, that sort of thing) they use multiple systems (sometimes running hardware and software developed separately). Every aspect of that is expensive, very, very expensive (what HMRC paid for their systems probably wouldn't buy you the project spec for a safety critical system) - in a previous employment I had some very peripheral involvement which gives me a bit of insight.
The world of commercial software, things are different. There
will ways in which the software/systems can fail - not all of them can be blamed on the developers. UK Gov PLC are well known as the worst sort of customer you could imagine - other than having deep pockets (with our money). Imagine you arrive to do a pre-planned rewire, with all the gear in the van. The customer tells you that he wants brass instead of white fittings - and you realise that wasn't specified either way on the original discussions. So you agree to the change, have to order new fittings, but at least the customer pays extra. You get part way through first fix, then the customer has decided that the kitchen has moved (and again, you find that the location wasn't actually nailed down in the original spec) - you can imagine the plumber isn't too happy either ! So you change the plans, pull out some cable, and carry on to the new plan. But at least the customer pays extra.
And so it goes on - you have just finished wiring the CU when the customer decides they want all RCBOs (but the spec was vague on that aspect as well). When you are ready to hook up the tails to the meter, you find the CU has to move. But at least the customer has deep pockets.
You can imagine this nightmare job is going to have overrun by a considerable amount - both time and money. And all the tradesmen think "if only they had a proper architect and project manager to do proper plans and schedules, they'd have saved a fortune" - before adding "but we've done alright on it, I wonder if he'll be building anything else I can bid for ?"
Then to cap it off, a few days later you read in the paper how this prestigious development has been way over budget and very late. All the reader comments are along the lines of it having been designed and built by incompetents charging over the odds for shoddy work
That is roughly how government IT procurement works. They don't have people who know how to specify and procure complex systems properly - so the contractors can always find lots of wiggle room for extras. Not to mention, before the spec is finished, the cabinet will have reshuffled and the new guy will stamp his authority by announcing widespread changes.
Of course, HMRC have the distinction of presiding over what is reckoned to be the most complex tax system in the world - the size of the tax manuals (measured in shelf-feet)
doubled while Tony B Liar was in No 10 and his mate Gordon B Ruin was in No 11 - it's a wonder the systems work at all !
Anything important - I keep my own copies, some as "hard copy" in a filing cabinet, some as data files with backups (including copies held 'off site' in case the house burns down).
As as I've been writing this, I've had some terminal sessions to systems at work in the background - there's been a power cut at the office so I'm having to make sure all the system come up properly, some take a while to check file systems etc. We should have a UPS running the whole lot - don't ask !