To take the hon. Lady’s final point first, yes, bereavement cases are being prioritised. Capita’s current working assumption is that the remaining backlog of over 6,700 quotations for past retirement dates and the 4,100 actionable bereavement cases will be systemically cleared through the rest of July and August, and I hope this House will hold it to that timetable.
More broadly, the hon. Lady is absolutely right about learning the lessons from this situation and robustly holding Capita to account. That is why, as the House will be aware, I took the decision to end, for example, its contract for the Royal Mail pension scheme. The House can be assured that I will not hesitate to take robust action.
On the hon. Lady’s other point, which I think is a central one, I am always very conscious—contrary to what the shadow Minister says—of the operational position week to week in order to ensure that I am still driving the improvement of this pension scheme to the level it should be at.
I am more than happy to take on board what my hon. Friend has said about streamlining MPs’ interaction with the service. The Parliamentary Secretary has passed on many of these points directly to Capita, and indeed has raised its behaviour directly with the Speaker’s Office. More broadly, I am more than willing to look at what my hon. Friend has said.
As ever, the Chair of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee makes very sensible points. I make it very clear from this Dispatch Box that Capita certainly should not in any sense be soft-pedalling. It has specific contractual duties to which I have been holding it and to which I will continue to hold it. Aside from the commercial and money aspect of this, hugely important though that obviously is for public money, he is right to highlight the emotional impact. These people—the Liberal Democrat spokesperson talked about bereavement—are in a very vulnerable position in their lives and are seeking to access the money that they themselves paid in.
First, in line with the Government’s policy of looking across contracts of high value, as I set out in my statement, I think this contract is a prime candidate for outsourcing. Indeed, this Government have introduced the public interest test, which I hope will most certainly give a different dimension to procurement and a different approach to insourcing, in line with the manifesto commitment on which my hon. Friend and I campaigned.
I am very sorry to hear about Caroline’s case. If the hon. Member is willing to write to me directly with the details, the Parliamentary Secretary will gladly look into that case.
I am very sorry to hear about my hon. Friend’s constituent; it is a tragedy that she passed away only yesterday. I would be glad if she wrote to me about that particular case. The Parliamentary Secretary will look into it personally, because of the nature of what has happened. For that family, and for every other family with an interest in this scheme, we absolutely must restore the level of service that they rightly expect.
On the right hon. Gentleman’s first point, we will look specifically at why that was the case. It should not have taken four-and-a-half months for him to receive a reply. The Parliamentary Secretary and I will look at the correspondence to see why that has happened. Secondly, on his point about confidence in the new July and August deadlines, what is critical—this is specifically why I am now looking at a range of options—is that we must be in a position where the service is being delivered properly.
Yes. First of all, the interest-free loans introduced earlier in the year are important, but I know they are not suitable or the choice for every beneficiary under the scheme. Secondly, as I indicated in my answer to the shadow Minister a moment ago, compensation is also very important. I reiterate to the House that I have surged significant resources into this scheme, but I am absolutely determined that it will not be the taxpayer who picks up the bill.
Well, quite. I am grateful to the hon. Lady, who I believe has had a few virtual surgeries. She has been in contact with my office and has a number of ongoing cases—I counted seven before I came in to deliver the statement. I think she has met the Parliamentary Secretary previously, but the Parliamentary Secretary would be more than willing to meet her again on this issue and to highlight to Capita the particular issue around Scottish divorce law.
Yes, it should absolutely be prioritising bereavement cases and people in the position my hon. Friend’s constituent finds himself in at the age of just 46. As I have said, Capita has set out the working assumption of clearing the backlog in July and August. She can rest assured that it will be held robustly to that.
The hon. Gentleman will be aware from my statement that £9.9 million has been withheld from Capita. I will continue, where milestones are—[Interruption.] He makes a valid point; that is precisely why I am now looking at a range of options, while continuing to prioritise operational performance in the short term. He is right that this is where we have been driven to under this contract—to look at this range of options. We have had deadlines that, I am afraid, have repeatedly not been met.
Looking forward, the Government have already announced their new public interest test to end outsourcing by default. From April next year, all contracts over £1 million have to be assessed for in-house viability before renewal. Departments exceeding £100 million in annual spend must also develop five-year insourcing strategies. We are moving swiftly to deliver our manifesto commitment.
I have not hesitated to use commercial levers to withhold millions of pounds from Capita when it has not delivered the performance it should have. My hon. Friend puts her finger on a very important point: it is for Capita to have a sense of self-awareness about its own conduct and the consequence for a lot of very vulnerable people.
On the principle of compensation, the right hon. Gentleman has a valid point. I set out some of the arrangements that are already in place, particularly in relation to interest where money should have been paid that was not paid on time. There is a second principle here, which is that the taxpayers of the United Kingdom will not pay for Capita’s failure.
To my right hon. Friend’s first point: yes, of course, the stakeholder group includes PCS. His question on Capita being awarded the contract in the first place is a valid one. It is fair to say that the previous pension provider was certainly not providing a sufficient level of performance, but, as he will have heard in my answer to the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire (Mike Wood), the contract was signed in November 2023; we inherited a long-term contract and I have been trying to deal with the issue since.
Quite simply, that should not be happening. If the hon. Lady is willing to write to me with precisely the information that was given, and what the correct information was, the Parliamentary Secretary will look into it.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right that the situation has been totally and utterly unacceptable. Capita has been and will be robustly held to account. That is why I have appointed an audit to look at the future of the scheme, as well as the remedial adviser—who is being appointed at Capita’s expense—to force rectification directly on the ground. There are two things too look at here: the immediate operational issues, and the future of the scheme.
I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman’s constructive tone. The Government have introduced the new public interest test to end outsourcing by default, which will mean that the reassessment will happen from the start of next year. It is important, as the hon. Gentleman fairly concedes, that we need to look back over a few years across different Governments.
Yes, we will continue to work with trade unions and other stakeholders. Yes, it is correct that £9.9 million in milestone payments has been withheld, but my hon. Friend can rest assured that I will not hesitate to continue to use all commercial levers if there is poor performance.
I know that the hon. Gentleman has looked carefully at a number of these things. The point of the public interest test is to end outsourcing by default, but he is right that there is an additional cross-governmental issue: the management of contracts. That is something that I have certainly been thinking about looking at in the Cabinet Office, and the hon. Gentleman is correct to say that we need to look at it across the board.
I am sorry to hear about the experience of my hon. Friend’s constituent; she can be assured that we will continue absolutely to hold Capita robustly to account every day.
Yes, and I am very sorry to hear about what has happened to Keith. The hon. Member will know about the pensions recovery taskforce, but if he can specifically tell me the date and what exactly happened to Keith, I would be more than happy to look into the matter.
I am very sorry to hear about what has happened to my hon. Friend’s constituent. He is right: competence and delivery are absolutely central under these third-party contracts. We need to hold to account every person who has been awarded the contracts to ensure that they are delivering for the public to the standard they are expected to.
I am very sorry to hear about the hon. Lady’s constituent. First, if her case is not being prioritised, we would want to see it individually so that we can take it up. Secondly, I am not sure whether her constituent has applied for a hardship loan, but that is the type of situation that I introduced the loan for earlier in the year. If the hon. Lady could write to the Cabinet Office with the details of the case, we could also look at eligibility, if a hardship loan was something her constituent wanted to look into.
I am grateful to all the public servants in my hon. Friend’s constituency and indeed across the country, who frankly deserve better. On past retirement quotations and past retirement dates, and on the actionable bereavement cases, as I indicated a moment ago, Capita’s working assumption is that they will be cleared during the rest of this month and next month. Collectively we must hold them to account for that.
The hon. Gentleman makes a very good point. I stand ready to continue with the surge resource; I have very frequent updates on that, and I give consideration to what additional resource might be required from me. However, he is absolutely right that we must not neglect the resource or prioritisation that Capita itself is giving to this. It is hugely important that it sticks to its word.
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his many years of service to the public and pay tribute to him for his work before entering the House. On holding people to account, he can rest assured that I have been doing just that since last autumn and through this year, and that I am doing it financially with Capita as well.
The hon. Lady is absolutely right to talk about the cost in people’s lives; considering what has happened when people are at their most vulnerable, it clearly goes beyond the monetary. We absolutely have to restore a contractual level of service as a priority and then, as I say, look at a range of options in the medium term.
On compensation, there is provision around interest. I would be very grateful if my hon. Friend could write to me about that specific case, and we will look into it.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. That is why the introduction of the public interest test to end outsourcing by default is so important for systemic change.
My hon. Friend makes a very good point about the drop-in for MPs. Again, that is why I felt I had to intervene directly, because even that was causing a problem. On his second point, he can rest assured that wherever contractual performance falls below the level required, I will take action—and I have. As I say, in the context of our policy on insourcing, we are also looking at this contract being a prime candidate.
My hon. Friend has spoken powerfully on many occasions about how her constituents have been affected by this issue; I know she has many cases. The introduction last month of the public interest test, which will end outsourcing by default, will make such a difference.
Yes, I am certainly happy to do that. We now have taskforce members on each one, but if Members are not getting the information that they require, I ask them please to escalate it to me.
Yes; they should be being prioritised. I can assure my hon. Friend that I will continue with the surge resourcing until I am satisfied that the contractual standard can be met—it the moment, I am not.
I am grateful to Carol for her service. She can be assured that I will robustly continue to hold Capita to account. I do not know whether, in her particular circumstances, a hardship loan would have been appropriate, but if my hon. Friend writes to me with the details of Carol’s case, I will be more than happy to look into it.