The Department of Science and Technology (DSIT) is laser focused on tackling the impact of legacy systems on public sector efficiency. In the State of Digital Government Review it reports that, in the average public body, 28% of tech systems were considered legacy.
As a result, hundreds of millions of pounds of investment was announced in the 2025 Budget to tackle legacy systems across the public sector and the Legacy IT Risk Assessment Framework was launched – a “qualitative risk-based approach designed to evaluate the criticality of legacy-related risks across government entities.”
There is also further indication that DSIT plans to expand data collection on legacy IT systems across government. This data will be used to inform a forthcoming Legacy IT Action Plan aimed at addressing ageing systems across the public sector.
It is unsurprising that the government is paying close attention to this issue. Decades of fragmented legacy systems have created a structural barrier to modern, responsive processes.
As a new era of digital transformation takes hold – driven by rapid advances in AI and automation – it is critical that the underlying foundations are fit for purpose. Without this, government will struggle to fully realise the transformative potential of these technologies.
These systems weren’t intentionally designed as cohesive infrastructures; they were bolted on over time. Built incrementally, they reflect a history of short-term funding cycles, shifting political priorities, and a necessary focus on maintaining service continuity. The result is a complex web of layered technologies where integration has become a workaround rather than a strategy – ultimately limiting the government’s ability to innovate and scale AI effectively.
The impact of fragmentation
This fragmentation is not just a technical issue; it is deeply rooted in how public sector organisations have been structured and governed. Departments have traditionally been funded, measured, and incentivised in silos, driving local optimisation at the expense of cross-government collaboration. While this approach has enabled stability, it has also entrenched duplication, inefficiency, and barriers to innovation.
The consequences are clear. Citizens encounter disjointed services, often required to provide the same information multiple times across different departments.
Internally, public sector teams spend disproportionate amounts of time reconciling data, managing workarounds, and maintaining complex integrations. Instead of focusing on delivering value, resources are absorbed by keeping the system running. Over time, this leads to higher operating costs, slower decision-making, and a gradual loss of trust in public services.
A shift from integration to re-use
A platform approach offers a fundamentally different path forward. Rather than continuing to connect an ever-growing patchwork of systems, it seeks to reduce complexity at its source. At its core, this model establishes a single, secure digital foundation on which multiple services and departments can operate. Data is created once and reused intelligently, and core capabilities such as identity, case management, workflow, and data models are standardised across the organisation.
This represents a shift from “connecting everything” to “building once and reusing many times.” Instead of designing services as isolated solutions, they are composed using shared components and common data structures. The result is not just technical simplification, but a more coherent and scalable operating model for government.
Importantly, this is not just a concept. We are already seeing this approach take shape across departments such as the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) and Integrated Corporate Services (ICS), where multiple legacy systems are being consolidated into unified platforms. These initiatives demonstrate how a platform model can enable a more agile, connected form of government, where policy, operations, and technology are better aligned.
The benefits of this shift are tangible and measurable. There is a clear efficiency gain. By consolidating systems and standardising processes, organisations can significantly reduce duplication and manual effort, freeing teams to focus on higher-value activities.
There is also a compelling cost argument. Rationalising legacy systems delivers immediate savings by reducing licensing, infrastructure, and integration overheads. Over time, the cost of change decreases. New services no longer need to be built from scratch; they can leverage existing components, accelerating delivery while reducing risk.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, service delivery improves. With a shared platform, services launch faster, are more consistent in quality, and are more responsive to user needs. In areas such as case management and citizen services, organisations adopting this model are already able to deploy new services in weeks – rather than months – and adapt far more quickly to policy or demand changes.
For citizens, this translates into more seamless, joined-up experiences. For staff, it means better tools and access to reliable, consistent information.
A shift from integration to re-use
Beyond efficiency and service delivery, a platform approach also strengthens governance, security, and compliance by design. A unified data model reduces duplication and improves data quality, traceability, and reporting. Security controls can be centralised and standardised, ensuring consistent identity management, access controls, and monitoring across the entire estate. Compliance becomes easier to demonstrate, with clearer data lineage and fewer systems to audit.
In contrast, fragmented environments inherently create gaps and inconsistencies. Each additional system and integration introduces potential vulnerabilities and increases the cost and complexity of managing risk. As regulatory requirements tighten and cyber threats evolve, this model becomes increasingly unsustainable.
However, adopting a platform approach is not simply a technology decision. It requires a fundamental shift in how organisations think about ownership, investment, and ongoing capability.
Leadership alignment is critical. Moving from departmental autonomy to shared outcomes demands strong, top-down commitment and a clear vision for cross-government collaboration. Funding and procurement models must also evolve, supporting long-term platform investment rather than short-term, siloed solutions. Enabling organisations to build the capabilities required to design, govern, and continuously evolve these platforms.
The cost of inaction
The risks of inaction are significant. Departments that continue to rely on fragmented systems will face rising costs, growing cyber and compliance risks, and increasing difficulty in meeting citizen expectations. As some parts of government move ahead with platform models, the gap in efficiency and service quality will only widen.
The platform approach is not just a technical upgrade; it is an opportunity to rethink how the governmentoperates. By removing silos and creating a shared digital foundation, the public sector can move towards a more agile, efficient, and citizen-centric future – one where technology finally enables, rather than constrains, transformation.
The question is no longer whether the government can afford to adopt a platform approach. It’s whether it can afford not to.
Andy Price
Andy Price is Chief Commercial Officer at Digital Modus, a leading public sector digital consultancy. He works with government and public sector organisations to modernise critical services through secure, user-centred technology, helping improve citizen experiences and deliver better public outcomes.
