Horizon Redress
(2 days, 12 hours ago)
Written StatementsRead Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Gareth Thomas)
This Government are fully committed to providing full and fair redress to victims of the Horizon scandal and making sure all of those responsible face justice and contribute to redress.
The latest redress figures published by my Department on Friday show that £768 million has now been paid to over 5,100 claimants across all redress schemes, representing a more than tripling of the total amount of redress paid to victims by Government since the end of June 2024.
I am pleased to inform the House that on Friday, the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, my right hon. Friend the Member for Stalybridge and Hyde (Jonathan Reynolds), held a positive and constructive meeting with Takahito Tokita (CEO, Fujitsu Ltd) and Paul Patterson (Director, Fujitsu Services Ltd).
The Secretary of State welcomed Fujitsu’s agreement to begin talks on Fujitsu’s contribution to compensation costs, ahead of the conclusion of Sir Wyn Williams’s Horizon IT inquiry—a joint statement was issued after the meeting and published on gov.uk and Fujitsu’s website. Fujitsu has previously stated its moral obligation to contribute to compensation for the victims of the Post Office scandal, which we have welcomed.
Officials from the Department for Business and Trade will continue to engage with Fujitsu representatives in full. We will not provide a running commentary on these discussions, but will keep both Houses informed at key points.
The Secretary of State commented after Friday’s meeting that we must never forget the lives ruined by the Horizon scandal and no amount of redress can take away that pain. But, as I am sure Members of this House agree, justice can and must be done. This Government are determined to hold those responsible to account, and will continue to make rapid progress on compensation and redress.
[HCWS507]
Infected Blood Compensation Authority Framework Document
(2 days, 12 hours ago)
Written StatementsRead Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office (Nick Thomas-Symonds)
Today, the “Infected Blood Compensation Authority Framework Document” will be published on gov.uk and ibca.org.
The framework document is a core document for an arm’s length body. It provides clarity between the role of the Cabinet Office as sponsor Department, and the Infected Blood Compensation Authority as an operationally independent organisation. The agreement in the framework document follows standard guidance for sponsor Departments and arm’s length bodies, as set out in managing public money guidance from HM Treasury. The framework document has been agreed between Cabinet Office, the board of the Infected Blood Compensation Authority and HM Treasury.
Publishing this document, which sets out how the relationship between the Cabinet Office and the Infected Blood Compensation Authority will operate, is an important demonstration of the commitment of the Government and the authority to transparency for victims of the infected blood scandal.
[HCWS509]
Gifting of Navy Commissioners’ Barge
(2 days, 12 hours ago)
Written StatementsRead Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Creative Industries, Arts and Tourism (Chris Bryant)
The National Maritime Museum, the organisation known by its brand name Royal Museums Greenwich (RMG), is seeking to dispose of a Navy commissioners’ barge via transfer by gift to another heritage body in the UK.
The barge was donated to the museum in 1935. There is no likelihood of the barge being displayed at any of the RMG sites in the foreseeable future and it is too large to store on any of the sites and make it accessible. Public accessibility is therefore best served elsewhere. RMG intends to deaccession and transfer the barge to Chatham Historic Dockyard Trust. Such transfers and disposals are a routine part of museum business and reflect museums’ ongoing review of their purpose, with changes to the collection reflecting that.
The barge has been valued at £400,000. It is the normal practice when a Government Department—in this instance an arm’s length body of the Department—proposes to make a gift of a value exceeding £300,000 for the Department concerned to present to the House of Commons a minute giving particulars of the gift and explaining the circumstances, and to refrain from making the gift until 14 parliamentary sitting days after the issue of the minute, except in cases of special urgency.
DCMS has written to the Chair of the Public Accounts Committee and the Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, informing them of the proposed course of action.
The Treasury has approved the proposal in principle. If, during the period of 14 parliamentary sitting days beginning on the date on which this minute was laid before the House of Commons, a Member signifies an objection by giving notice of a parliamentary question or a motion relating to the minute, or by otherwise raising the matter in the House, final approval of the gift will be withheld pending an examination of the objection. I inform the House today of the departmental minute which sets out the detail of the decision, which has been laid in both Houses.
The transfer is expected to take place during the financial year 2025-26, subject to completion of the departmental minute process.
A copy of the departmental minute will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses of Parliament.
[HCWS508]
Performance Review of Digital Spend
(2 days, 12 hours ago)
Written StatementsRead Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Chief Secretary to the Treasury (Darren Jones)
The Government are committed to the digital transformation of public services and modernising the state. Successful digital transformation will improve user experience, help target support to the people who need it, and ensure sustainable public finances.
While to date, digital transformation has been incremental and lacked ministerial leadership, the Government’s comprehensive “Performance Review of Digital Spend” marks a step change, seeking to understand what barriers to reform are created by Government themselves and what steps can be taken to remove those barriers. This review was led jointly by HM Treasury and the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology.
The review highlighted significant challenges in how digital projects are funded, managed and tracked. Current processes can be overly complex for many digital initiatives and experimental technologies, delaying decision-making and service delivery. There is often insufficient funding for service maintenance and improvement, and financial pressures can mean that short-term savings are prioritised over long-term digital investments.
Many Departments face the dual burden of managing growing reliance on legacy IT systems while being constrained by funding models that prioritise the control of inputs rather than long-term strategic impact and delivery against outcomes. The absence of agreed-upon metrics to measure project outcomes also limits the ability to demonstrate value for money in digital spending.
The review also found that current approaches to policymaking can inadvertently narrow delivery choices early, limiting the range of options considered during investment appraisals and preventing a full exploration of potential solutions. Furthermore, misunderstood guidance and the unsuitable application of appraisal methods by Departments risks hindering digital investment.
The Government will take forward a number of important reforms to address these issues built on three key pillars:
testing alternative funding mechanisms;
enhanced training and guidance; and
improved outcomes metrics and evaluation.
Four new funding mechanisms, which focus on improving funding processes for innovative technologies such as AI, live digital services, portfolios and risk reduction respectively will be tested and scaled. Further details of each of these funding mechanisms is set out in the report. The Government’s aim is to test, iterate and institutionalise different approaches to both funding and evaluation of digital spend with a strong focus on demonstrating progress against outcome metrics in exchange for faster and more agile funding arrangements.
Targeted training for Departments and teams involved in the approvals process will focus on building better evidenced bids for spending reviews and on how to use agile funding approaches. New Green Book supplementary guidance for digital will be published to help Departments provide better evidence proposals. The Government are also taking a digital first approach to spending decisions in spending review 2025 to ensure that strategic judgements about the UK Government’s digital needs inform departmental allocations.
There will also be a strong focus on developing new and improved outcome metrics and robust evaluation plans for major digital programmes. These efforts will be enabled by a proactive support package provided by the Government Digital Service (GDS), National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (NISTA), the Evaluation Task Force (ETF) and HM Treasury. Finally, strategic digital, data and technology priorities for new business case development will be agreed by Ministers at least six months before future spending reviews, to help ensure that decisions can be made on the basis of a more robust evidence base.
The report has been published on gov.uk at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/performance-review-of-digital-spend and I have deposited a copy of the report in the Library of the House.
[HCWS511]
Statutory Consultee System Reform
(2 days, 12 hours ago)
Written StatementsRead Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook)
Statutory consultees play an important role in the planning system, providing expert advice and information on significant environmental, transport, safety and heritage issues to ensure good decision making. However, their involvement introduces additional requirements into the process of securing permission for some developments.
We need a planning application process which considers the correct statutory and technical issues in a timely and proportionate manner, enabling confident and timely decision making. It is therefore a matter of concern that local planning authorities and developers report that the statutory consultee system is not currently working effectively.
The concerns expressed by local planning authorities and developers in relation to the operation of the statutory consultee system are wide-ranging. They include statutory consultees failing to engage proactively; taking too long to provide their advice; reopening issues that have already been dealt with at the plan-making stage; submitting automatic holding objections which are too often subsequently withdrawn at a very late stage in the process; and frequently issuing holding responses that allow statutory deadlines to be met while seeking over-specified levels of information from developers over longer timeframes. The final advice that statutory consultees provide can also often seek gold-plated outcomes, going beyond what is necessary to make development acceptable in planning terms.
Where there is inconsistency in advice, or delays in the provision of final responses, there can be substantial uncertainty and delay for applicants. Local planning authorities and developers can also often exacerbate these problems, by providing inadequate or poor quality information, or through blanket and inappropriate referrals to statutory consultees. This diverts resource from supporting those significant applications which require statutory consultee expertise.
The Government are determined to return the statutory consultee system to meeting their goal of supporting high-quality development through the swift provision of expert relevant advice to inform decision making. It is essential that statutory consultees look to provide practical, pragmatic advice and expertise which is focused on what is necessary to make development acceptable. That is why on 26 January, the Deputy Prime Minister and the Chancellor announced a moratorium on the creation of new statutory consultees and committed to reviewing the existing arrangements.
Today, I am confirming to the House a number of steps we are taking to improve these arrangements in England: putting support for growth at the heart of the system; limiting the scope of statutory consultees to where advice is strictly necessary; reminding local planning authorities that they are able to proceed with a decision where advice is not provided on time if they have sufficient information to do so; establishing a new performance framework with greater ministerial scrutiny of the actions of statutory consultees; and ensuring the system has the right funding with the right incentives.
Ensuring the statutory consultee system supports economic growth
First, the Government are clear that the statutory consultee system must work in support of development and economic growth—reflecting the central place of these objectives in the Government’s plan for change. This principle must run through the actions of all those involved in the system, from local planning authorities—reflecting the economic growth policies set out in the national planning policy framework—to the statutory consultees themselves. In seeking advice and providing it, the goal should be to ensure that wherever possible good quality development can progress, drawing on the right expert input where necessary.
Scope of statutory consultees in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 regime
Secondly, we want to limit the statutory requirement to consult to only those instances where it is necessary to do so, and remove gold-plating where advice and support can be provided through other means. This means looking at both the existing set of statutory consultees, and the specific application types on which they provide advice.
We will therefore consult this spring on the impacts of removing a limited number of statutory consultees. Our initial intention is that this will include Sport England, the Theatres Trust and the Gardens Trust. We continue to recognise the importance of the policy areas with which these organisations are engaged, and recognise their value to local communities. Access to culture is an important driver of local growth and access to open green spaces and playing fields is crucial to our ambitions to increase physical activity levels across the nation and deliver on our health mission. We remain committed to ensuring our playing field capacity is protected and extended. Our national planning policy framework ensures these interests are maintained in the planning system and there is an important, ongoing role for these organisations working with local authorities and developers on the development of local and strategic plans, and through the publication of guidance and advice.
In addition, we will review the range and type of planning applications on which statutory consultees are required to be consulted and consider whether some types of application could be removed, or addressed by alternative means of engagement and provision of expert advice. In some cases, this could be done through undertaking more effective strategic engagement at the local and strategic plan level, reducing the need for comments on individual planning applications, and increasing the role of standing advice. We will consult on these changes in the spring alongside the impact of removal of the organisations identified above, before taking forward any resulting changes in secondary legislation later this year.
Expectations on local planning authorities in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 regime
Thirdly, and reflecting the focus on supporting economic growth, local planning authorities should limit consultation of statutory consultees to only those instances where it is necessary to do so. Local planning authorities must still consult with statutory consultees where there is a legislative requirement to do so, noting that if there is relevant and up to date standing advice published with respect to that category of development, then consultation is not required. Applications may need to be referred to particular statutory consultees outside of the statutory requirements where their expertise is required, given the nature of the development, but should not be referred where standing advice is sufficient.
However, routine and blanket referrals to statutory consultees outside the statutory requirements should not take place, as this creates unnecessary administrative burdens for both local planning authorities and the statutory consultee. Where a statutory consultee has not provided advice within the agreed period, the decision maker should consider whether they can make a decision in the absence of this advice.
Decisions should not be delayed in order to secure advice from a statutory consultee beyond the 21—or 18—day statutory deadlines unless there is insufficient information to make the decision or more detailed advice may enable an approval rather than refusal. The national planning policy framework sets out that significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth, and timely decision making is in line with this objective.
In those limited circumstances where the statutory consultee is expected to provide advice on significant issues and it is necessary—for example, on safety critical issues—appropriate extensions to the 21 day deadline should be granted so that sufficient and timely information is available to inform the decision.
Performance of statutory consultees
Fourthly, the role of statutory consultees is to provide evidence of impacts and expertise in a timely manner so that the decision maker has all relevant considerations before them. This should be provided in the form of advice to the decision maker, and should not be framed as an objection to the development.
In circumstances specified through direction, a local planning authority may be required to consult the Secretary of State, including where they propose to determine an application against the recommendation of a statutory consultee. The Secretary of State may then direct the manner in which the application is determined, including calling in the application. As part of the review, we will consider existing directions and when such directions may appropriately be made in the future.
To support timely and effective engagement with the planning system, we will also institute a new performance framework. As part of this framework, an HM Treasury and MHCLG Minister will meet annually with chief executive officers of key statutory consultees in order to review their performance. We will work with all statutory consultees to develop action plans and key performance indicators to ensure that the service they deliver is effective, proportionate and timely. We will also explore where greater digitisation, improved guidance, and improved local authority training can support performance improvements.
Funding of statutory consultees
Finally, the Government recognise that statutory consultees need to be resourced adequately, and on a sustainable basis to enable them to support the Government’s growth objectives in full. We intend to develop a model to support this sustainable funding, while ensuring we are incentivising efficient and constructive engagement in applications, and in the planning system more generally—and we will set out further details in the coming weeks.
Taken together, these steps will help refocus the statutory consultee system on its core purpose: supporting development through the swift provision of expert relevant advice to inform decision making.
[HCWS510]