UK Government PoC: Power Platform Accesses AWS Data Without Duplication via Private Multi-Cloud

A UK government Proof of Concept (PoC) led by Hitachi Solutions Europe has shown that Microsoft applications — including Power Platform, Dynamics 365 and Microsoft Copilot — can securely operate on live data that remains resident in Amazon Web Services (AWS) without copying or moving that sensitive information, using a private, Zero Trust‑aligned connector that links the clouds and preserves compliance and data sovereignty controls. (learn.microsoft.com)

Background​

The public sector has long struggled with the practical realities of multi‑cloud estates. Agencies often hold data and workloads across Microsoft Azure, AWS, Google Cloud Platform (GCP) and private or sovereign environments; until recently, connecting best‑of‑breed SaaS and platform tooling across those islands has meant either moving data, building brittle synchronization layers, or accepting reduced functionality. The demonstrated PoC from Hitachi Solutions aims to change that equation by exposing AWS‑resident data to Microsoft business applications in real time — without duplication and without traversing the public internet.
This is not a theoretical idea. Microsoft Dataverse supports “virtual tables” (virtual entities) which let Power Platform apps surface external data as if it were native to Dataverse, while leaving the source records in place. That capability explicitly avoids duplication and supports runtime access to external systems via secure data providers. This technical pattern is an established, supported route for integrating external sources into Power Apps and Dynamics‑style experiences. (learn.microsoft.com)
At the networking layer, cloud vendors and neutral interconnect providers have mature patterns for private, high‑performance cross‑cloud connectivity: combinations of AWS Direct Connect, Microsoft ExpressRoute, and carrier or colocation‑hosted fabrics (Equinix Fabric, Megaport and similar) can create private paths between cloud environments that avoid the public internet and reduce egress risk and latency. These architectures are widely recommended for multi‑cloud, low‑latency, and compliance‑sensitive scenarios. (aws.amazon.com, equinix.com)

---

What the PoC claims it delivered​

The Proof of Concept — described in recent reporting by PublicTechnology and presented by Hitachi Solutions Europe — makes several operational and security assertions about the Secure Multi‑Cloud Connector (SMCC):

• Microsoft Power Platform and Copilot used live, production case data that remained stored in AWS; no data duplication was required.
• Connectivity was established over a private link (no public internet exposure), integrated with a Zero Trust‑based architecture and mapped against UK government security frameworks.
• The PoC was completed in eight weeks and enabled use cases such as live case‑load dashboards, workflow automation for caseworkers, virtual assistants and AI‑driven analysis to accelerate decision‑making.
• The solution is described as bi‑directional, scalable, and suitable for other cloud providers such as GCP.

These are consequential claims: if accurate and repeatable, they materially change the options available to government IT teams, allowing them to pair Microsoft productivity and AI tooling with AWS‑hosted data without wholesale migrations or sacrificing compliance controls.

---

How it works — the technical pattern​

Virtualisation at the data layer (no duplication)​

The core architectural idea used in the PoC aligns with virtualisation patterns already supported by Microsoft technologies. Dataverse’s virtual tables (virtual entities) allow Dataverse and Power Platform to present external data as if it were native, while the data itself remains in the external system and is retrieved on demand. This eliminates the need for nightly syncs, ETL pipelines or persistent data copies — a key benefit for sensitive case‑handling systems. (learn.microsoft.com)
Virtual tables are not a magical cure; they have feature and performance trade‑offs (for example, limitations around auditing, certain Dataverse features and some client‑side scenarios). However, for read‑heavy dashboards, on‑demand lookups, and workflows that can operate on live records, they provide a proven method to surface external records inside Power Apps and Dynamics‑driven processes. (learn.microsoft.com, microsoft.com)

Private, provider‑neutral networking​

To avoid public internet exposure, the PoC uses a private networking model between the Microsoft application environment and AWS where the data sits. This pattern mirrors the industry best practice of using Direct Connect and ExpressRoute (or via a neutral colocation provider’s fabric) to build private connectivity between cloud providers. Solutions from neutral interconnect vendors simplify cross‑cloud routing and reduce internet‑facing egress, which is important for both security posture and predictable latency. Published engineering guidance from AWS and Microsoft details the same connectivity patterns and their trade‑offs. (aws.amazon.com, learn.microsoft.com)

Zero Trust and governance controls​

The PoC is described as implementing a “scalable Zero Trust architecture” and aligning with UK Government security frameworks. Practically, that should mean:

• Strong identity and conditional access (Entra ID / Azure AD or federated identity).
• Least‑privilege, role‑based access controls and fine‑grained authorization at the application layer.
• Encryption in transit and at rest, with private connectivity preventing exposure to the public internet.
• Comprehensive logging, monitoring and auditability to satisfy compliance and evidentiary needs.

Those are standard controls for high‑assurance public sector deployments — and while the PoC claims to follow them, the specific accreditation path (e.g., IL2/IL3/IL4/FedRAMP equivalence) for a production rollout was not publicly disclosed. That detail is important for departments that must meet specific assurance regimes.

---

Why this matters for government IT​

• Choice of best tool for the job: Departments no longer need to standardise all data on a single hyperscaler before they can use the preferred SaaS or platform capability. That reduces political and procurement friction and lets teams adopt specialist capabilities faster.
• Avoiding risky data migrations: Large, sensitive datasets are expensive and risky to migrate. The virtual access model allows governments to keep data where governance, legal or contractual constraints require it, while still enabling modern citizen services on top of that data. (learn.microsoft.com)
• Accelerating AI/low‑code adoption: Exposing live data to Microsoft Copilot and Power Platform—while preserving residency—unlocks AI‑driven insights and automation without the need to create separate data lakes solely for tooling. This can materially speed up use‑case delivery (dashboards, triage automation, virtual assistants) that reduce case processing time.

---

Cross‑checking and independent verification​

To evaluate the claims beyond the PoC announcement, several independent technical facts were verified:

• Dataverse virtual tables are an official Microsoft capability that allows external data to appear in Power Platform without duplication. This confirms the technical feasibility of surfacing AWS‑hosted records into Power Platform apps without copying them into Dataverse. (learn.microsoft.com)
• Private, non‑internet connectivity patterns between AWS and Azure are well‑documented — AWS Direct Connect and Microsoft ExpressRoute (or neutral fabric providers like Equinix) are specifically recommended for private, low‑latency cross‑cloud networking. That validates the networking basis the PoC claims to use. (aws.amazon.com, equinix.com)
• Hitachi as a vendor already maintains strategic partnerships and productisation across Microsoft and AWS ecosystems (multiple joint announcements in 2024–2025), establishing organisational experience and precedent for multi‑cloud integration projects of the kind required for the SMCC. (hitachi.com)

Taken together, these independent facts support the technical plausibility of the PoC’s headline claims — the components exist and are supported by major cloud and interconnect vendors. However, proof of a single PoC does not guarantee enterprise‑scale readiness for all government use cases; caution and rigorous accreditation remain necessary.

---

Strengths and opportunities​

• Practical multi‑cloud interoperability: The PoC demonstrates a way to end the politics of “pick a cloud” by enabling Microsoft tools to work with AWS data without migration. That’s a pragmatic win for agencies with sprawling estates.
• Reduced data duplication and lower operational overhead: By surfacing data via virtual tables and private connectors, organisations avoid the cost, complexity and security footprint of additional data stores. This is especially important for casework and health records. (learn.microsoft.com)
• Faster delivery and better citizen outcomes: Real‑time dashboards, automated triage and Copilot‑assisted casework can accelerate decision cycles and reduce backlogs. The PoC claims measurable gains in case processing speed and staff productivity.
• Alignment with government interoperability goals: The approach fits naturally with principles such as interoperability, reuse and ‘security by design’ articulated in government technology practice frameworks. That makes it a potential template for cross‑agency reuse and standardisation.

---

Risks, caveats and what to watch for​

• Accreditation and assurance are still necessary. A PoC that “works” technically is not equivalent to formal accreditation under UK government impact levels or other national assurance regimes. Agencies must map the SMCC architecture to their specific controls and pass independent assurance to run case‑handling systems in production. The PoC description does not publish formal accreditation artifacts.
• Operational complexity and skills requirements. Multi‑cloud private networking, identity federation, and secure connector orchestration require cloud networking, identity and security engineering skills that are in short supply. Agencies must budget for training, runbooks and sustained operations. Industry analysis of multi‑cloud patterns consistently flags the operational burden as a core risk. (learn.microsoft.com, megaport.com)
• Performance and feature trade‑offs. Virtual tables and on‑demand integrations are excellent for many scenarios, but they have limitations (e.g., some Dataverse features, reporting, and offline behaviours). For heavy transactional workloads or scenarios that need rich Dataverse features (auditing, change tracking), replication or hybrid models may still be necessary. (learn.microsoft.com)
• Data protection, legal and procurement complexity. Cross‑cloud access does not remove the need to understand contractual terms, data residency rules, third‑party access controls and law‑enforcement or judicial access regimes. Agencies must explicitly document data flows and maintain DPIAs and lawful processing records. This remains a critical governance activity.
• Vendor concentration risk in the tooling layer. While the approach reduces data migration to a single hyperscaler, it still concentrates workflow and AI tooling within Microsoft’s commercial stack. Agencies should plan exit strategies, portability tests and ensure APIs and integration contracts remain robust to avoid new forms of lock‑in. This is a strategic governance decision, not a purely technical one.

---

Practical checklist for government IT leaders considering the SMCC approach​

• Confirm regulatory and accreditation requirements for the workload (e.g., IL levels, FedRAMP equivalence, NCSC guidance). Ensure the SMCC design can be mapped to those controls and that an accreditation plan exists.
• Run a focused pilot with production‑like scale and representative data; test failover, latency, logging and incident response end‑to‑end.
• Evaluate Dataverse virtual table constraints against the intended feature set (dashboards, automation, auditing, offline support). Where features are missing, design compensating controls or hybrid replication. (learn.microsoft.com)
• Design identity and least‑privilege models using Entra ID or federated identity; adopt conditional access and step‑up authentication for sensitive operations.
• Build multicloud network resilience using Direct Connect / ExpressRoute patterns and a neutral fabric provider for redundancy; run egress and latency tests under realistic load. (aws.amazon.com, equinix.com)
• Define a long‑term operational model: runbooks, 24/7 monitoring, incident playbooks, and a skills uplift programme for networking, identity and cloud security teams.
• Document data flow, DPIAs, and legal rationale; ensure procurement contracts cover multi‑cloud interconnect, audit access and vendor responsibilities.

---

Policy and procurement implications​

This PoC should shift procurement conversations from “which cloud do we pick?” toward “which capabilities do we need and where must the data remain?” That shift enables a modular procurement model where:

• Data hosting and sovereignty are chosen based on legal and mission requirements.
• Application and productivity tooling are selected for capability and usability.
• Interconnect and security controls are procured as an integral service (including interconnect fees, fabric providers, and ongoing managed networking).

Government procurement teams must update standard contracts to reflect multi‑cloud interconnect, continuous compliance attestations and incident response responsibilities across vendors.

---

Where this fits in the broader industry movement​

The SMCC approach is the practical extension of two converging industry trends: (1) vendors investing in integration points so organisations can mix and match hyperscaler services rather than fully committing to a single provider, and (2) the maturation of private, neutral networking fabrics that make secure, low‑latency cross‑cloud routing operationally feasible.
Hitachi’s public-facing work with Microsoft, AWS and Google Cloud over recent years demonstrates the company’s strategic positioning as a multi‑cloud integrator; those relationships provide the organisational capability needed to build and support cross‑cloud solutions at government scale. (hitachi.com)

---

Limitations and statements that require further proof​

The PoC report contains some assertions that merit further, independent validation before treating them as universally applicable:

• The claim that the initial deployment completed in “eight weeks” is plausible for a focused PoC, but timeline reproducibility will depend on organisational readiness, pre‑existing connectivity, and procurement velocity. This figure should be treated as a PoC milestone, not a guaranteed delivery window for all departments.
• The specific security posture and accreditation status for the PoC were not published in full. Agencies must obtain the architecture’s compliance artifacts (design attestations, penetration test results and accreditation decisions) before rolling the design into production.
• While the PoC references bi‑directional integration, practical implementations may need to restrict write operations or use controlled APIs for updates to avoid accidental policy or provenance gaps; confirmation of how write‑through, transactions and rollback are handled in the SMCC is necessary for high‑assurance casework. This detail was not included in the public announcement and should be validated in any procurement exercise.

---

Conclusion​

The Hitachi Solutions PoC represents a meaningful and pragmatic advancement in government multi‑cloud interoperability: it demonstrates a credible technical pattern to let Microsoft applications use AWS‑resident data in real time, behind private connectivity and with a Zero Trust orientation. The building blocks — Dataverse virtual tables, private Direct Connect/ExpressRoute interconnects and neutral fabric providers — are established and supported by major vendors, and Hitachi’s multi‑cloud experience gives the approach operational credibility. (learn.microsoft.com, aws.amazon.com, hitachi.com)
However, the move from PoC to production requires careful, agency‑specific assurance work: formal security accreditation, performance validation, operational runbooks and procurement changes to codify cross‑vendor responsibilities. When those pieces are put in place, the SMCC pattern can help public sector organisations escape costly migrations, accelerate AI and low‑code adoption, and deliver faster, joined‑up services to citizens — while still protecting the sensitive personal data at the heart of public service delivery.

---

Quick reference: authoritative technical sources consulted​

• Official Microsoft documentation on Dataverse virtual tables and how they enable real‑time access to external data. (learn.microsoft.com)
• AWS engineering guidance on private network connectivity patterns between AWS and Azure (Direct Connect / ExpressRoute guidance). (aws.amazon.com)
• Equinix and neutral fabric provider materials explaining multicloud private routing as an operational practice for cross‑cloud deployments. (equinix.com, deploy.equinix.com)
• Hitachi and Microsoft public releases describing strategic partnerships and multi‑cloud productization efforts that underpin integrator capability. (hitachi.com)
• PublicTechnology coverage of the Hitachi Solutions PoC and its claimed outcomes.

This evidence base supports the technical plausibility of the PoC’s claims while also highlighting the governance and operational work required to move such a capability into accredited, production service at scale.

---

Source: PublicTechnology Hitachi Solutions demonstrates secure use of Microsoft tools with AWS data in major win for government cloud interoperability

 

[ChatGPT]

Hitachi Solutions Europe’s Proof of Concept (PoC) that let Microsoft applications — including Power Platform, Dynamics 365 and Microsoft Copilot — operate on live, sensitive case data stored in Amazon Web Services (AWS) without copying or moving that data represents a practical leap for secure multi‑cloud interoperability in government.

Background​

Government IT estates are no longer single‑vendor islands. Critical systems and citizen data frequently span Microsoft Azure, AWS, Google Cloud Platform (GCP) and specialist or sovereign clouds, creating a political and operational headache: building modern citizen services often forces a trade‑off between tooling choice and data sovereignty. The recent PoC from Hitachi Solutions Europe — which surfaced live AWS data into Microsoft business applications over private connectivity and a Zero‑Trust aligned connector — aims to remove that compromise and let departments pick the right tool for the job without relocating sensitive records.
This is not simply a vendor demo; the PoC claims to have completed an initial deployment in eight weeks and to have enabled real‑time dashboards, workflow automation, virtual assistants and AI‑driven analysis on highly secure case management data while preserving compliance controls. Those claims, if repeatable, materially change options for department architects who must respect legal, contractual and operational constraints while modernising services.

---

Overview of the Secure Multi‑Cloud Connector (SMCC)​

What SMCC does, in plain terms​

• Surfaces AWS (and potentially GCP) resident data into Microsoft applications without copying records into Dataverse.
• Establishes private interconnects between cloud providers to avoid public internet exposure.
• Maps access controls and telemetry into a Zero‑Trust architecture so application requests are authenticated, authorised and auditable end‑to‑end.
• Enables bi‑directional integration patterns (subject to governance controls) to support dashboards, automations and AI assistants.

The practical result is that a Power App or a Copilot‑assisted workflow can interact with a live case record that remains in AWS, while the Microsoft tooling treats the record as if it were a native Dataverse entity — but without duplicating the underlying dataset. This pattern leverages virtualisation concepts at the data layer rather than wholesale replication.

Core architectural building blocks​

• Data virtualisation: Microsoft Dataverse’s virtual tables (virtual entities) are a mature pattern to present external data inside Power Platform without persistent copies. This is central to the PoC’s no‑duplication claim.
• Private networking: Using AWS Direct Connect, Microsoft ExpressRoute and/or neutral interconnect fabrics (Equinix, Megaport, etc.) to create non‑internet cross‑cloud links that reduce exposure, egress risk and latency.
• Zero Trust controls: Identity and conditional access (Entra ID / Azure AD or federated identity), least‑privilege authorisation, encryption in transit and comprehensive logging for evidence and audit.

These components are not speculative — each is an established capability from major cloud vendors and interconnect providers. The innovation in SMCC is how these pieces are combined and hardened for government use cases.

---

Why this matters for government services​

Practical multi‑cloud freedom​

Many departments have to retain data in a specific cloud for legal, contractual or operational reasons. Previously, those constraints forced either:

• Moving or duplicating data to access richer tooling, or
• Accepting reduced functionality and manual workarounds.

SMCC promises to break that impasse by enabling Microsoft’s productivity and AI tooling to operate directly on that resident data without migration — a pragmatic win for agencies with sprawling estates and mixed procurement histories.

Faster, AI‑enabled outcomes for citizens​

The PoC demonstrated immediate, service‑level benefits that translate into better citizen outcomes:

• Live caseload dashboards that reduce stale reporting and enable faster triage.
• Automated workflows and alerts that reduce routine manual processing for caseworkers.
• Virtual assistants and Copilot‑driven support to accelerate decisions and reduce backlog.

These aren’t cosmetic gains; they directly shorten case processing times and improve responsiveness where lives or welfare services depend on timely intervention. Delivering these features while keeping data residency intact is the core value proposition.

---

Technical validation: how credible are the PoC claims?​

The headline claims are technically plausible and align with vendor‑documented capabilities, but they carry important caveats.

What the public record verifies​

• Dataverse virtual tables are a supported pattern allowing Power Platform to present external data without copying into Dataverse. This validates the SMCC’s no‑duplication approach for many read‑heavy scenarios.
• Private cross‑cloud networking (Direct Connect + ExpressRoute, or neutral fabric) is an established architecture for avoiding the public internet and achieving predictable latency and reduced egress exposure. This supports the PoC’s claim of private connectivity.
• Zero Trust components (identity, conditional access, fine‑grained RBAC, encryption, telemetry) are standard requirements for government assurance and are referenced in the PoC description as implemented controls.

These independent facts show the connector’s building blocks exist and are supported by major cloud and interconnect vendors, making the PoC technically credible.

What remains to be proven in production​

• Formal security accreditation: The public announcement did not publish full accreditation artifacts (impact levels, penetration tests, formal IL/FedRAMP‑equivalent approvals). PoCs rarely include full assurance packages; agencies must obtain and verify them before production use. This is a critical caveat.
• Operational performance at scale: Virtual table access works well for on‑demand reads and many workflow scenarios, but heavy transactional workloads, offline clients or features that rely on full Dataverse capabilities (auditing, offline sync, certain plugin behaviors) can require replication or hybrid patterns. Departments should validate latency, failure modes and throughput in real‑world conditions.
• Write semantics and transactional guarantees: The PoC references bi‑directional integration, but practical production designs will need explicit handling of writes, rollback, transactional integrity and conflict resolution when making changes across clouds. The public description did not include full detail on transactional models and safeguards.

---

Strengths: what SMCC delivers well​

• Data sovereignty preservation: Keeps sensitive records where law, contract or policy requires them to stay, while enabling modern tooling on top.
• Reduced duplication and operational overhead: Eliminates or reduces ETL, nightly syncs and duplicated stores that create security and governance risk.
• Faster feature delivery: Low‑code apps, dashboards and Copilot assistants can be developed more quickly when they can access live resident data. This accelerates pilots and shortens time‑to‑value.
• Aligns with government policy goals: Interoperability, reuse and security‑by‑design principles are easier to realise when tooling choice and data hosting are decoupled.

---

Risks, trade‑offs and governance considerations​

Accreditation and assurance risk​

A functioning PoC is not a production accreditation. Departments must map the SMCC architecture to their specific impact level and assurance frameworks, commission independent testing, and maintain evidence packages (penetration testing, design attestations, operational controls) before moving case‑handling systems into production. Treat the eight‑week PoC as an encouraging milestone, not an accreditation guarantee.

Operational complexity and skills​

Private cross‑cloud networking, identity federation and continuous monitoring require specialised skills in networking, identity, cloud security and DevOps. Governments must budget for:

• Training and upskilling,
• Robust runbooks and incident playbooks, and
• Managed operational support or retained services where internal skills are limited.

Feature and performance trade‑offs​

Virtual table patterns have known limitations — auditing, certain Dataverse features, offline usage and complex transactions may not be fully supported. For heavy transactional systems, a hybrid replication model or targeted data staging may still be necessary. Departments should evaluate Dataverse constraints against use‑case requirements and design compensating controls where necessary.

Legal, procurement and data protection complexity​

Cross‑cloud access shifts complexity from technical migration to legal and procurement domains. Departments must:

• Document data flows, DPIAs and lawful processing,
• Ensure contracts cover interconnect, shared responsibilities, and vendor access rights, and
• Understand jurisdictional access and law‑enforcement disclosure regimes that may apply to the cloud where the data sits.

Vendor concentration risk​

While SMCC reduces the need to move data to one hyperscaler, it concentrates workflow, automation and AI tooling within Microsoft’s stack. That can create a different form of lock‑in at the tooling layer; agencies should plan for portability, exit strategies and API‑level interoperability tests.

---

Practical checklist for IT leaders evaluating SMCC or similar approaches​

• Confirm the regulatory and accreditation requirements for the workload (IL level, FedRAMP equivalent, NCSC guidance) and require a published assurance plan from suppliers.
• Run a focused pilot with production‑like scale and representative data, including failover, latency and end‑to‑end logging.
• Evaluate Dataverse virtual table constraints against the intended feature set (auditing, offline support, transaction semantics). Design compensating controls where gaps exist.
• Define the network model and redundancy (Direct Connect / ExpressRoute or neutral fabric), test egress behavior and measure latency under load.
• Map identity, conditional access and RBAC end‑to‑end and test from non‑admin user contexts; verify telemetry aggregation and alerting.
• Update procurement templates to codify multi‑cloud interconnect, incident responsibilities and continuous compliance attestation.
• Plan skills uplift, runbooks and a managed operations model for sustained support.

---

Procurement and policy implications​

SMCC shifts a key procurement conversation: from “which cloud do we pick?” to “which capabilities do we need and where must the data remain?” That enables modular buying strategies where data hosting is driven by legal and mission needs, and application tooling is chosen for capability and user experience. To capitalise on this shift, procurement teams must update clauses to include cross‑vendor interconnect terms, ongoing assurance responsibilities, and multi‑party incident response. The approach also fits with technology code‑of‑practice objectives like interoperability and reuse — but those policy benefits only materialise when assurance, operational models and contractual terms are aligned.
Globally, similar moves are visible in other government programmes that centralise buying and push multi‑vendor cloud adoption. While US federal procurement (OneGov‑style agreements) is addressing scale economics and discounted access to Copilot and cloud services, the essential architectural and governance lessons are the same: central deals accelerate adoption but do not replace careful, workload‑specific assurance and operational readiness.

---

What to ask Hitachi (and partners) before procurement decisions​

• Can you publish the architecture’s accreditation artifacts (pen test reports, security architecture attestation, IL/FedRAMP‑equivalence evidence)?
• How are write operations handled end‑to‑end? What transactional guarantees, rollback and provenance controls exist?
• What latency and throughput SLAs are achievable for representative workloads, and what redundancy models exist for the private interconnect?
• Which Dataverse features are available against virtual entities and which require replication? What compensating controls are recommended?
• How do contracts handle incident response across vendors and what continuous compliance attestations do you provide?

---

Broader industry context and what this foreshadows​

The SMCC PoC reflects two converging industry trends:

• Vendors investing in integration points to let organisations mix best‑of‑breed hyperscaler services instead of committing all workloads to a single provider.
• Maturation of private networking fabrics from neutral providers (Equinix, Megaport) that make secure, low‑latency cross‑cloud routing practical for regulated workloads.

Hitachi’s positioning as a multi‑cloud integrator and partner to both Microsoft and AWS gives the company the organisational capability to productise such connectors at scale; the question for departments will be how quickly assurance, procurement and operational processes catch up.

---

Conclusion​

Hitachi Solutions Europe’s PoC demonstrating Microsoft Power Platform, Dynamics 365 and Copilot operating on live AWS‑resident data via a Secure Multi‑Cloud Connector is a credible and practical step forward for secure government multi‑cloud interoperability. The combination of Dataverse virtual tables, private cross‑cloud connectivity and Zero‑Trust governance makes the headline claims technically plausible and useful for departments that must preserve data residency while modernising services.However, the path from PoC to production requires disciplined assurance: published accreditation artifacts, performance validation under representative load, clear contractual responsibility for cross‑vendor incidents, and a sustained operational model with the right skills and runbooks. Departments that pair SMCC‑style architectures with rigorous assurance, procurement update and operational readiness will gain a powerful tool to accelerate AI and low‑code innovation while preserving the legal and security constraints that govern citizen data.Expect more departments and agencies to trial the SMCC approach, but treat the eight‑week PoC as a starting milestone — not a turnkey guarantee. The most defensible route is a staged adoption: focused pilot, independent assurance, procurement codification and a managed operations plan that keeps citizens’ privacy and national security at the centre.

---

Source: PublicTechnology Hitachi Solutions demonstrates secure use of Microsoft tools with AWS data in major win for government cloud interoperability