Question
The right hon. Member for Salisbury (John Glen) says that people should be held accountable for their actions, but let us remember that the Conservatives allocated this contract to Capita, knowing that it was a recidivist, continually breaking contracts that had been outsourced. It is totally unacceptable that a woman living in Upton in my constituency who gave 40 years of her life to public service has been left with no response from Capita for over 300 days since we contacted them. Since then, she was diagnosed with cancer. We can imagine the problems that people affected by this issue face in any event; pile on the problems that she has with illness, and we can imagine the personal anguish. Has the Minister been able to establish whether Capita is in breach of contract? Finally, let me say this: bring it back in house.
Answer
I am sorry to hear of the experience of my hon. Friend’s constituent, which is particularly terrible. I encourage him to write to me about it, so that I can look into it. As for bringing the scheme back in house, we are looking at all the different in-house options at the minute; we have a team doing that. We are working with the trade unions and other experts on it, but I am really clear that Capita needs to clean up this mess; it will not be the UK taxpayer who pays to do it. We will make sure that we recoup any costs of the additional support that we have provided.11% point-scoring 11% vibes
Verdict: AMBER (30/100)
The reply only partly answers the question. It does not say whether the Minister has established that Capita is in breach of contract. It implies fault, saying Capita needs to clean up the problem and that costs will be recouped, but it offers only to look into the constituent's case. On whether the contract will be brought back in-house, it describes the review process, including the in-house options being examined, without committing to a decision. The constituent would most likely need to ask both questions again for a direct answer.
How we got there
| Question item | Coverage | Specificity | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Minister has been able to establish if Capita is in breach of its contract. | Partially Addressed | Hedged | The reply never says whether the Minister has established that Capita is in breach of contract. It offers to look into the constituent's case and says Capita 'needs to clean up this mess' and that costs will be recouped, which implies fault but does not answer the breach question itself. |
| Whether the Government will bring the contract back in house. | Partially Addressed | Hedged | The reply describes a process (looking at 'all the different in-house options', a dedicated team, work with unions and experts) but does not say whether the Government will bring the contract back in house, which is the noncommittal 'we are considering options' pattern. |