The Government addressed the problem of the loss of confidential data yesterday — and a new case involving three million learner drivers — by overwhelming us with a mass of information. It was less a case of bad news being buried than of it being lost.

It was like an early version of The Twelve Days of Christmas: four progress reports, three capability reviews and two Commons statements.

A partridge and a pear tree would have come in handy.

There were three distinct developments: First, the problem of data loss; secondly, the Government’s actions to tighten procedures; thirdly, and related, the Cabinet Office reviews into the efficiency of the Treasury and Revenue & Customs.

Q&A: how can I protect myself?

Advice for anyone who fears their personal data may be misused by fraudsters after Britain's worst ever security breach

• Government under pressure over taxman's giant blunder

Related Internet Links

• Online security: full coverage

Background

• Police step in as other CDs have gone astray

• Moment’s blunder puts half the country at risk

• Data watchdog seeks dawn-raid powers

• New data law 'urgently needed'

Related Links

• Treasury attacked for poor leadership

• Commons sheds light on a delicate problem

The main focus last night was on Ruth Kelly’s disclosure of the loss of further data in the US (a classic illustration of how even Government is now globalised).

Even more revealing, however, is an “interim progress report” by Sir Gus O’Donnell, the Cabinet Secretary, on data handling procedures in Government after the loss of the child benefit discs last month.

The running theme is “there, but for the grace of God” as department after department says that it is reviewing its internal security policies, reassessing the risks associated with data sharing and similar formulas.

The Crown Prosecution Service reveals that it has more than 600 sites attached to its network. Whitehall is alive to the sound of reviews.

Remedial action is already being taken, particularly by Revenue & Customs, to ensure tighter control over data.

This was the main thrust of a further interim report by Kieran Poynter into the original child benefit data loss.

How far are these failures mainly procedural? Are they the result of structural faults, or perhaps inherent in the holding of masses of data by the Government? By coincidence, a capability or efficiency review was already being conducted by a Cabinet Office team into Revenue & Customs.

The report is not all bad. Revenue & Customs is internationally admired for its efficiency in bringing the money in to fund public services and has recently improved relations with big business but there are serious structural flaws, which place it near the lower end of the Whitehall performance table: not as bad as the Home Office 18 months ago, but like the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Department for Communities and Local Government.

While the leaders of Revenue & Customs are of high quality, they have not energised their staff generally: “igniting passion, pace and drive” is seen as an “urgent development area”, as is the use of evidence in management.

Internal surveys show that, by a two-to-one margin, staff take a negative rather than positive view of change, and job satisfaction is declining.

That is a culture in which serious errors like the data loss are not surprising.

The Treasury has also been reviewed, although this had to wait until Gordon Brown ceased to be Chancellor.

While the overall assessment of leadership and strategy is positive, the report includes the deadly phrase that “some stakeholders and government departments believe that the Treasury would improve outcomes if it acted with greater humility and in a more open and inclusive way”.

Everyone in Tony Blair’s 10 Downing Street, and most of the rest of Whitehall, would strongly agree.

Times Recommends

• We must lead the world to stability
• The recession's a blessing in disguise
• The guilty men who sent mum to Iceland