Lord Agnew of Oulton

The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority.

Please see the letter attached from the National Statistician and Chief Executive of the UK Statistics Authority.

The Lord Agnew of Oulton DL

House of Lords

London

SW1A 0PW

1 April 2025

Dear Lord Agnew,

As National Statistician and Chief Executive of the UK Statistics Authority, I am responding to your following Parliamentary Questions:

• To ask His Majesty's Government what estimate they have made, based on the latest approved business case, of the average cost per user of the Integrated Data Service, including a breakdown of how this cost is calculated (HL6020).

• To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the suitability of successive Senior Responsible Owners of the Integrated Data Programme having been appointed for 35 per cent and 50 per cent of their time, given its whole life cost of £525 million and "red" delivery confidence assessment rating; and what evidence they hold to show that this approach is appropriate for projects of this scale and complexity. (HL6094).

• To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of whether to continue to fund the Integrated Data Programme at its whole life cost of £525 million, given its "red" delivery confidence assessment rating and the 26 per cent reduction in forecast monetised benefits between 2022–23 and 2023–24 (HL6095).

• To ask His Majesty's Government how many times the Office for National Statistics’ Integrated Data Service has undergone an accreditation assessment or audit under the Digital Economy Act 2017 since 2020, and what the results of such assessments or audits have been (HL6096).

The Integrated Data Programme (IDP) Business Case is being reviewed as part of Spending Review 2025. From when the Integrated Data Service (IDS) is fully operational, the current estimate of the average gross cost per user accessing the IDS is approximately £4,645 per year over the financial years 2026/2027 to 2028/2029. This cost is calculated by including the service support costs for users, the IT licensing and usage costs, and the platform operational management costs.

The current Senior Responsible Owner (SRO) has dedicated substantially more than 50% of their time to the Integrated Data Programme. The "red" delivery confidence assessment rating primarily relates to obtaining data owner permission for analysis, as highlighted in numerous other reports . Significant progress is being made in unblocking data flows, however senior sponsorship is still required to fully realise the benefits of mission delivery. We’re now making good progress in obtaining that sponsorship.

The annual cost of the service is now low. The majority of the expenditure has been invested in building infrastructure that is also used for other core ONS business and it is now ready for use.

Future funding of the IDP is under consideration as part of Spending Review 2025, the outcome of which will not be announced until 11 June 2025. All Government Major Projects Portfolio (GMPP) programmes are subject to an Accounting Officer assessment as part of established governance procedures.

The IDS was accredited under the Digital Economy Act (2017) in September 2023. The accreditation of the IDS under the DEA was reviewed after 12 months, in September 2024.

During the development of the platform prior to September 2023, the IDS was audited by the UKSA Research Accreditation Panel to establish the readiness of the IDS for DEA accreditation. These audits occurred in February 2023 and June 2023.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Sir Ian Diamond

1For further details, you can refer to the Independent Review of the UK Statistics Authority by Professor Denise Lievesley CBE and Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee: Transforming the UK’s Evidence Base report.

The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority.

Please see the letter attached from the National Statistician and Chief Executive of the UK Statistics Authority.

The Lord Agnew of Oulton DL

House of Lords

London

SW1A 0PW

1 April 2025

Dear Lord Agnew,

As National Statistician and Chief Executive of the UK Statistics Authority, I am responding to your following Parliamentary Questions:

• To ask His Majesty's Government what estimate they have made, based on the latest approved business case, of the average cost per user of the Integrated Data Service, including a breakdown of how this cost is calculated (HL6020).

• To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the suitability of successive Senior Responsible Owners of the Integrated Data Programme having been appointed for 35 per cent and 50 per cent of their time, given its whole life cost of £525 million and "red" delivery confidence assessment rating; and what evidence they hold to show that this approach is appropriate for projects of this scale and complexity. (HL6094).

• To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of whether to continue to fund the Integrated Data Programme at its whole life cost of £525 million, given its "red" delivery confidence assessment rating and the 26 per cent reduction in forecast monetised benefits between 2022–23 and 2023–24 (HL6095).

• To ask His Majesty's Government how many times the Office for National Statistics’ Integrated Data Service has undergone an accreditation assessment or audit under the Digital Economy Act 2017 since 2020, and what the results of such assessments or audits have been (HL6096).

The Integrated Data Programme (IDP) Business Case is being reviewed as part of Spending Review 2025. From when the Integrated Data Service (IDS) is fully operational, the current estimate of the average gross cost per user accessing the IDS is approximately £4,645 per year over the financial years 2026/2027 to 2028/2029. This cost is calculated by including the service support costs for users, the IT licensing and usage costs, and the platform operational management costs.

The current Senior Responsible Owner (SRO) has dedicated substantially more than 50% of their time to the Integrated Data Programme. The "red" delivery confidence assessment rating primarily relates to obtaining data owner permission for analysis, as highlighted in numerous other reports . Significant progress is being made in unblocking data flows, however senior sponsorship is still required to fully realise the benefits of mission delivery. We’re now making good progress in obtaining that sponsorship.

The annual cost of the service is now low. The majority of the expenditure has been invested in building infrastructure that is also used for other core ONS business and it is now ready for use.

Future funding of the IDP is under consideration as part of Spending Review 2025, the outcome of which will not be announced until 11 June 2025. All Government Major Projects Portfolio (GMPP) programmes are subject to an Accounting Officer assessment as part of established governance procedures.

The IDS was accredited under the Digital Economy Act (2017) in September 2023. The accreditation of the IDS under the DEA was reviewed after 12 months, in September 2024.

During the development of the platform prior to September 2023, the IDS was audited by the UKSA Research Accreditation Panel to establish the readiness of the IDS for DEA accreditation. These audits occurred in February 2023 and June 2023.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Sir Ian Diamond

1For further details, you can refer to the Independent Review of the UK Statistics Authority by Professor Denise Lievesley CBE and Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee: Transforming the UK’s Evidence Base report.

The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority.

Please see the letter attached from the National Statistician and Chief Executive of the UK Statistics Authority.

The Lord Agnew of Oulton DL

House of Lords

London

SW1A 0PW

1 April 2025

Dear Lord Agnew,

As National Statistician and Chief Executive of the UK Statistics Authority, I am responding to your following Parliamentary Questions:

• To ask His Majesty's Government what estimate they have made, based on the latest approved business case, of the average cost per user of the Integrated Data Service, including a breakdown of how this cost is calculated (HL6020).

• To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the suitability of successive Senior Responsible Owners of the Integrated Data Programme having been appointed for 35 per cent and 50 per cent of their time, given its whole life cost of £525 million and "red" delivery confidence assessment rating; and what evidence they hold to show that this approach is appropriate for projects of this scale and complexity. (HL6094).

• To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of whether to continue to fund the Integrated Data Programme at its whole life cost of £525 million, given its "red" delivery confidence assessment rating and the 26 per cent reduction in forecast monetised benefits between 2022–23 and 2023–24 (HL6095).

• To ask His Majesty's Government how many times the Office for National Statistics’ Integrated Data Service has undergone an accreditation assessment or audit under the Digital Economy Act 2017 since 2020, and what the results of such assessments or audits have been (HL6096).

The Integrated Data Programme (IDP) Business Case is being reviewed as part of Spending Review 2025. From when the Integrated Data Service (IDS) is fully operational, the current estimate of the average gross cost per user accessing the IDS is approximately £4,645 per year over the financial years 2026/2027 to 2028/2029. This cost is calculated by including the service support costs for users, the IT licensing and usage costs, and the platform operational management costs.

The current Senior Responsible Owner (SRO) has dedicated substantially more than 50% of their time to the Integrated Data Programme. The "red" delivery confidence assessment rating primarily relates to obtaining data owner permission for analysis, as highlighted in numerous other reports . Significant progress is being made in unblocking data flows, however senior sponsorship is still required to fully realise the benefits of mission delivery. We’re now making good progress in obtaining that sponsorship.

The annual cost of the service is now low. The majority of the expenditure has been invested in building infrastructure that is also used for other core ONS business and it is now ready for use.

Future funding of the IDP is under consideration as part of Spending Review 2025, the outcome of which will not be announced until 11 June 2025. All Government Major Projects Portfolio (GMPP) programmes are subject to an Accounting Officer assessment as part of established governance procedures.

The IDS was accredited under the Digital Economy Act (2017) in September 2023. The accreditation of the IDS under the DEA was reviewed after 12 months, in September 2024.

During the development of the platform prior to September 2023, the IDS was audited by the UKSA Research Accreditation Panel to establish the readiness of the IDS for DEA accreditation. These audits occurred in February 2023 and June 2023.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Sir Ian Diamond

1For further details, you can refer to the Independent Review of the UK Statistics Authority by Professor Denise Lievesley CBE and Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee: Transforming the UK’s Evidence Base report.

It remains the case that Permanent Secretaries are appointed on fixed term tenures and that their appointments are published on GOV.uk.

As with all other civil servants, the performance of Permanent Secretaries is monitored through formal performance management arrangements. The majority of First Permanent Secretaries report to the Cabinet Secretary with Second Permanent Secretaries reporting to (First Permanent Secretary) Heads of Departments. Performance management activity is undertaken by the relevant line manager.

Objectives for each Permanent Secretary are set at the beginning of the performance year and include input from Ministers. Mid-year and end-year reviews are conducted by the relevant line manager, with feedback/evidence from Ministers forming an important part of the overall performance assessment. Ministers do not participate in mid and end-year review meetings.

Guidance on the process is not published.

In March, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster announced that the Government will be strengthening performance processes for the SCS.

The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority.

Please see the letter attached from the National Statistician and Chief Executive of the UK Statistics Authority.

The Lord Agnew of Oulton DL

House of Lords

London

SW1A 0PW

1 April 2025

Dear Lord Agnew,

As National Statistician and Chief Executive of the UK Statistics Authority, I am responding to your following Parliamentary Questions:

• To ask His Majesty's Government what estimate they have made, based on the latest approved business case, of the average cost per user of the Integrated Data Service, including a breakdown of how this cost is calculated (HL6020).

• To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the suitability of successive Senior Responsible Owners of the Integrated Data Programme having been appointed for 35 per cent and 50 per cent of their time, given its whole life cost of £525 million and "red" delivery confidence assessment rating; and what evidence they hold to show that this approach is appropriate for projects of this scale and complexity. (HL6094).

• To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of whether to continue to fund the Integrated Data Programme at its whole life cost of £525 million, given its "red" delivery confidence assessment rating and the 26 per cent reduction in forecast monetised benefits between 2022–23 and 2023–24 (HL6095).

• To ask His Majesty's Government how many times the Office for National Statistics’ Integrated Data Service has undergone an accreditation assessment or audit under the Digital Economy Act 2017 since 2020, and what the results of such assessments or audits have been (HL6096).

The Integrated Data Programme (IDP) Business Case is being reviewed as part of Spending Review 2025. From when the Integrated Data Service (IDS) is fully operational, the current estimate of the average gross cost per user accessing the IDS is approximately £4,645 per year over the financial years 2026/2027 to 2028/2029. This cost is calculated by including the service support costs for users, the IT licensing and usage costs, and the platform operational management costs.

The current Senior Responsible Owner (SRO) has dedicated substantially more than 50% of their time to the Integrated Data Programme. The "red" delivery confidence assessment rating primarily relates to obtaining data owner permission for analysis, as highlighted in numerous other reports . Significant progress is being made in unblocking data flows, however senior sponsorship is still required to fully realise the benefits of mission delivery. We’re now making good progress in obtaining that sponsorship.

The annual cost of the service is now low. The majority of the expenditure has been invested in building infrastructure that is also used for other core ONS business and it is now ready for use.

Future funding of the IDP is under consideration as part of Spending Review 2025, the outcome of which will not be announced until 11 June 2025. All Government Major Projects Portfolio (GMPP) programmes are subject to an Accounting Officer assessment as part of established governance procedures.

The IDS was accredited under the Digital Economy Act (2017) in September 2023. The accreditation of the IDS under the DEA was reviewed after 12 months, in September 2024.

During the development of the platform prior to September 2023, the IDS was audited by the UKSA Research Accreditation Panel to establish the readiness of the IDS for DEA accreditation. These audits occurred in February 2023 and June 2023.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Sir Ian Diamond

1For further details, you can refer to the Independent Review of the UK Statistics Authority by Professor Denise Lievesley CBE and Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee: Transforming the UK’s Evidence Base report.

For 2024/2025, the Cabinet Office has now received 12 business cases. Of these, four have been approved to date, one has been rejected, and seven are ongoing.

The table below sets out the number of Senior Civil Servants (SCS) who left the Cabinet Office and turnover of Senior Civil Servants in the year to the dates shown.

*a record of the completed interview is not centrally held

**exit survey response only, therefore planned leavers

The SCS Exit survey was relaunched in April 2024 to encourage a better response rate. SCS leavers who resign or where the departure is unplanned - for example, when a member of staff resigns or moves to another government department - are expected to have an exit interview with their line manager or the HR Business Partner.

SCS leavers that are planned - for example, when a member of staff retires, their fixed term contract or loan ends - do not need to take part in an exit interview, although they are able to do so.

The Cabinet Office’s use of procurement intermediaries is governed by the Cabinet Office Commercial Directorate and any requirements commissioned via this route remain subject to the same level of assurance and governance as it would if it had been undertaken in-house.

As part of this specific procurement competition, the Cabinet Office Commercial Directorate confirmed with Government Commercial Function that Bain & Company were meeting all applicable conditions that permit them to be included in this mini competition.

The financial restatements of the Government Property Agency Accounts 2022/23 resulted in both an increase and a decrease in right of use assets because they related to two separate changes to lease terms for different properties at different stages of their lease lifecycle.

The surrender and grant of a new head lease in July 2022 related to a vacant property undergoing major refurbishment as part of the GPA’s Whitehall Campus Programme. The new head lease resulted in an increase to right of use assets because there was no corresponding finance sub-lease during the refurbishment. The GPA therefore retained all the risks and rewards incidental to ownership of the right of use asset.

The Deed of Variation in March 2023 to extend a sub-lease term by 12 years to align with the head lease resulted in the classification of the sub-lease being reassessed as a finance lease rather than an operating lease. This was because the sub-lease term now represented in excess of 75% of the expected useful economic life of the underlying right of use asset. The reclassification resulted in a decrease in right of use assets because the GPA derecognised the asset previously retained when the sub-lease was classified as an operating lease.

On that basis, we are satisfied that IFRS 16 has been applied appropriately across the head lease and sub-lease transactions.

As committed to in the Civil Service People Plan, an Annual Review has been conducted to monitor its progress and to ensure effective delivery. We intend to publish the key findings of the review in due course.

Quarterly progress reports are also provided to the Cabinet Secretary and to the Civil Service People Board to ensure senior level oversight and scrutiny.

We are taking steps to ensure the Plan remains aligned to the government’s priorities and meets the evolving needs of the Civil Service.

The Government remains committed to ensuring that the Civil Service Compensation Scheme is fair to individuals and delivers best value for money for the taxpayer.

We are reviewing the consultation launched under the previous administration on reforms to the Civil Service Compensation Scheme, and will provide an update in due course.

In accordance with section 10 of the Procurement Act 2023 ("the Act"), the Procurement Review Unit (“PRU”) only has oversight of the activities of contracting authorities under the Act.

Any procurement carried out under framework agreements managed under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 does not fall within the remit of the PRU.

Many intermediary procurement models are straightforward public contracts where there is no requirement to publish subcontracts under either the Procurement Act 2023 or the Public Contract Regulations 2015.

Where contracting authorities are awarding contracts using frameworks awarded under the Procurement Act 2023, they will need to follow the Act’s noticing provisions. In the case of most Public Contracts this will normally include publication of both a Contract Award and then a Contract Details Notice on the Find a Tender platform, which is the publicly available portal for all transparency information on procurement. Furthermore, notices contain linking information that allows notices to be connected- enabling detailed data analysis on how frameworks are being used. All this information on public procurement is in the public domain and can be searched by the citizen, free of charge in an accessible way.

Where contracting authorities are awarding contracts using framework agreements awarded under the previous procurement regime, they are required to publish an Awarded Opportunity Notice on the Contracts Finder platform.

The Cabinet Office concluded that the removal of the non-compete clause (Clause 65) from contract 2887470\5 did not constitute a material modification under regulation 72 of the Public Contracts Regulations because it did not materially alter the nature of the contract or the obligations thereunder.

The Government recognises the value of competition in marketplaces and believes that removing the clause ensures that there is fair competition and supports equal treatment of market participants.

The original Emergency Planning College Bidders’ Brief makes multiple references to international training and overseas markets and was subsequently covered within the initial contract.

The change within the deed of variation to amend the UK-only constraint was necessary to clarify that international training may require the delivery of face-to-face training at overseas locations, in order to fully meet the contractual requirements for international training.

The UK-only constraint continues to apply to services provided to the Authority under the contract.

Departments are responsible for their own SAMPs, and required to update these plans yearly. Guidance and tools are provided to ensure consistency and effectiveness.

In the event an updated asset plan is not produced,the Government Chief Property Officer can write to the Principal Accounting Officer alerting them to the requirement.

Last year, all ministerial departments produced an updated asset plan except the Department for Business & Trade (DBT), although plans for the offices occupied by DBT were set out in the Government Property Agency’s office portfolio SAMP. DBT will produce a plan for 2025.

By agreement, HM Treasury and Department for Education did not produce a 'stand alone' departmental asset plan but featured in the Government Property Agency's office portfolio SAMP as onboarded clients.

The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost. The Infrastructure and Projects Authority publishes details on the estimated budgets and delivery timescales for each of the Government Major Projects Portfolio projects as part of its annual report, from which the change in cost and schedule between years for individual projects can be calculated.

There is no memorandum of understanding between the Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA) and HMRC in place. However, the Cabinet Office worked closely with HMRC in the development of the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme, and HMRC passed regulations to exempt compensation payments from tax, as is standard for compensation schemes. The Government expects IBCA to continue to work closely with HMRC as required for the delivery of the scheme.

The Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA) has worked closely with the Public Sector Fraud Authority to undertake comprehensive Fraud Risk Assessments for the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme. This will continue to be a key part of IBCA’s planning approach as it builds and expands its claims service.

The (draft) Infected Blood Compensation Scheme Regulations 2025 do not confer any criminal investigatory powers on the Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA). However, a small team is being established to intervene where there are suspicious circumstances relating to a particular case, and IBCA will keep the size of that team under review.

Regulation 80 (4) of the draft Infected Blood Compensation Scheme Regulations 2025 sets out that for where an overpayment of compensation is made by the Infected Blood Compensation Authority, the excess amount is recoverable as a civil debt. IBCA does not have any bespoke powers to prosecute suspected fraudulent claims, but will have the same tools as other public bodies to take action against fraudulent activity. The Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill, introduced to Parliament on 22 January 2025, proposes new powers granted to the Public Sector Fraud Authority, to be used upon referral of a case from a public body. This meets the Government’s commitment for the better recovery of money owed to the taxpayer where public money has been stolen or overpaid.

Currently no departments have implemented the Central Employee Identifier. We will provide an update on implementation timescales in due course.

Customers who have used CCS agreements in FY2022/23 were eligible to receive a payment in proportion to the amount of income collected by CCS from suppliers as result of those customers’ transactions.

Activity by customers on 231 frameworks has contributed to the distribution to individual customers, with the lowest value payment threshold being set at £1k, resulting in just under 1,500 customers being eligible to receive a payment. These payments are not part of any written agreement and are non-contractual.

CCS has not made an assessment of the administrative costs that have been, or will be, incurred in operating this scheme.

CCS is considering its opportunities to reduce its levy rates on a case by case basis as new agreements are put in place. Frameworks do not provide a level of committed spend and therefore reducing levy rates across the board would incur an unnecessary degree of risk into CCS’s financial planning. CCS’s levy rates are the lowest of all Public Sector Buying Organisations, at an average of 0.7% across the whole portfolio.

HM Treasury (HMT) and the Office for National Statistics (ONS) initiated a formal review of the sector classification in 2024 of CCS as part of their ongoing programme of assessments of the statistical and financial reporting classification of public sector bodies in the National Accounts. The ONS completed the final review in October 2024 and published the outcome on its website. It concluded that CCS’s existing sector classification as a public corporation is correct. This means that CCS will remain a Trading Fund.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/articles/developmentofpublicsectorfinancestatistics/september2024

On 13 February the Government published a National Procurement Policy Statement (NPPS), which sets out our priorities for public procurement and maximises the impact of every pound spent. New measures to support the transformation of public procurement and to deliver on the Government’s Plan for Small Businesses includes requiring all government departments, executive agencies and non-departmental public bodies to set three-year targets for direct spend with small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) from 1 April 2025, and Voluntary, Community, and Social Enterprises (VCSEs) from 1 April 2026, and publish progress annually.

Under this new policy, departments will be responsible for publishing their own spend with SMEs on an annual basis. Departmental SME Action Plans (published from 1 April 2025) will include SME spend targets approved by departmental Ministers and any previous financial years unpublished SME spend data.

The Government is determined to ensure the £400 billion of public money spent on public procurement annually delivers economic growth, supports small businesses, champions innovation, and creates good jobs and opportunities across the country.

On 13 February the Government published a National Procurement Policy Statement (NPPS), which sets out our priorities for public procurement and maximises the impact of every pound spent. New measures to support the transformation of public procurement and to deliver on the Government’s Plan for Small Businesses includes requiring all government departments, executive agencies and non-departmental public bodies to set three-year targets for direct spend with SMEs (from 1 April 2025) and VCSEs (from 1 April 2026) and publish progress annually.

The Deed of Variation to contract 2887470\5, enables the transition of the Emergency Planning College (EPC) to the UK Resilience Academy from 15 April 2025 to deliver strategic national resilience training and exercising outcomes.

Given the complexities of the contract covering the management of the physical site, coupled with the provision of training services, the Authority determined that a medium-term permitted extension would allow for better development and planning for a new competitive procurement opportunity, whilst maintaining continuity of key services.

The contract provides for an extension of not less than 2-years and not more than 5-years, and does not include any financial values or thresholds. The extension does not change the economic balance of the Agreement in favour of the Contractor. International sales were covered within the Bidders' Brief as part of the original tender and subsequently the contract.

The reclassification of the sub-lease from an operating lease to a finance lease arose due to a correction in a sub-lease extension which was identified during 2023/24.

A lease end extension that was agreed by both parties in February 2023 was not clearly documented in the Deed of Variation, resulting in GPA’s Horizon system incorrectly recording the lease end date as 2033. As a result, this was accounted for as an operating lease as at March 2023.

The error in the lease end date was identified during 2023/24 when the Deed of Variation needed updating for occupancy and rent setting changes. At this point, the Horizon system was updated to reflect the correct lease end date of 2045. Correcting the lease end date changed the classification from an operating lease to a finance lease.

GPA has strengthened its control processes as a result of identifying this error. Unambiguous data tables are now attached to each occupancy agreement and signed off by both Property and Finance teams to: prevent future misinterpretation of lease terms, ensure the accurate uploading of lease data onto the Horizon system, and ensure that the accounting for leases accurately reflects the agreed lease terms.

The Procurement Act, which comes into force on 24 February 2025, will allow the Government to investigate high-risk suppliers on behalf of the entire public sector.

International debarment lists can be considered as part of a debarment investigation that determines whether an exclusion ground applies and enables a Minister of the Crown to decide whether the supplier should be placed on the debarment list.

A live debarment investigation does not prevent a supplier from bidding for public contracts or provide a basis for any further regulatory or legal action against the supplier.

The Procurement Act, which comes into force on 24 February 2025, will allow the Government to investigate high-risk suppliers on behalf of the entire public sector.

International debarment lists can be considered as part of a debarment investigation that determines whether an exclusion ground applies and enables a Minister of the Crown to decide whether the supplier should be placed on the debarment list.

A live debarment investigation does not prevent a supplier from bidding for public contracts or provide a basis for any further regulatory or legal action against the supplier.

In accordance with Part 10, the results of any investigations, including any s.109 recommendations and progress reports submitted by the contracting authority may be published, assessed on a case by case basis. Such documents will be published on GOV.UK. Any s.109 recommendations will be issued to support the contracting authority’s compliance with the requirements of the Act and follow a lessons learned approach in order for contracting authorities to reflect on their own approach to compliance and identify areas for improvement.

The Procurement Review Unit (PRU) has been established to exercise the procurement oversight powers set out in Part 10 of the Procurement Act 2023 (the Act). Part 10 comprises three provisions (sections 108-110) which provide for the investigation of a contracting authority’s compliance with the requirements of the Act, the issuing of recommendations to a contracting authority following an investigation and the publishing of statutory guidance to all contracting authorities.

Under section 108 (procurement investigations) the PRU can formally request, via notice, that a relevant contracting authority provide documents and give assistance in connection with the investigation, as is reasonable. The contracting authority has 30 days to comply with the notice.

The conducting of on-site visits to aid investigations may fall under the scope of “give assistance” and would be by mutual agreement between the PRU and the contracting authority. The circumstances giving rise to an on-site visit would have to be proportionate and relevant to the investigation. On-site audits or visits are not currently contemplated as part of a standard PRU investigation, and nor are we considering an amendment to Part 10 of the Act to provide such powers, although the procurement oversight powers and processes will remain under review as the new regime embeds.

For 2024/2025, the Cabinet Office has received 11 business cases. Of these, two have been approved to date.

The UK Government Functional Standard for Property GovS 004 sets expectations for the management of government property - including mandating a forward-looking strategic asset management plan (SAMP).

Departments are responsible for their own asset plans, and the Office of Government Property in the Cabinet Office supports their planning as part of the assurance process for the property function. Departments are asked to share their ‘working copy’ plans each year, which provides the ‘functional centre’ with an overview of their strategic intentions to help inform the development of cross-government policy and programmes.

In 2024, all but one ministerial department produced an asset plan. By agreement, some departments did not produce a stand alone plan but are featured in the Government Property Agency’s office portfolio SAMP as its clients. The Government Chief Property Officer is currently writing to all Property Leaders in Departments reminding them of their responsibility to have an up to date strategic asset management plan.

The Cabinet Office collects data on the duration and cost of inquiries from departments, inquiries’ own reports, and other publicly available information.

We have provided details on all statutory inquiries established since 2005 in the table below.

We do not hold information on projected costs; under section 17 of the Act, the procedure and conduct of an independent public inquiry are a matter for the Chair, including acting with regard to the need to avoid any unnecessary cost.

The Procurement Act 2023 does not contain financial penalties for failure to publish pipeline notices. There are sufficient remedies and processes in place to manage compliance and the Cabinet Office considers it would not be good use of public funds to introduce such a measure. As per the previous answer (HL3974), Cabinet Office is establishing the Procurement Review Unit which will play a big part in procurement oversight and any non-compliance will be monitored and potentially investigated in detail.

The Cabinet Office maintains a list of public sector dependent suppliers where the suppliers have a contractual obligation to confirm their status to us. 7 suppliers have currently notified us that they are public sector dependent suppliers. The Cabinet Office does not hold a list of all public sector dependent suppliers.

There are several methods of gaining CIPD Membership including study options, apprenticeships and experiential routes. For experiential routes, there is a central Cabinet Office contract with the CIPD for departments to utilise. The costs associated with this accreditation to date are provided below:

Departments may also utilise other methods that are available for their SCS and Grade 6/7 HR professionals to gain CIPD membership that are not included in the central Cabinet Office contract

No, the Central Employee Identifier has not been fully implemented across government. The capability to issue IDs is available but changing the legacy ERPs across government departments to hold this has been deemed inefficient with the new cluster ERPs about to commence rollout. These will be following the data standards laid out in the Nova model which includes holding the Central Employee Identifier.

The figures for March 2024 contained in the Cabinet Office Government Major Projects Portfolio (GMPP) data predate the closure of the programme. The baseline figure of £5.5m relates to expenditure in financial year (FY) 23/24. Actual expenditure in FY 23/24 was £5.7m which represents an overspend of 3.6%. The £20m cited in the GMPP reflected the original funding for the FY.

​Information is not centrally held by the Cabinet Office on the total number of procurement frameworks currently in use across the public sector.

Crown Commercial Service (CCS) analysis suggests there are approximately 2,275 frameworks in the public sector that compete with CCS agreements.

Under the Transforming Public Procurement reforms, there will be a requirement to register procurement frameworks on the central Transparency Platform. This will enhance transparency and provide greater visibility of frameworks in operation.

This information is not centrally held and would come at disproportionate cost to the Government/Department in producing this information.

The Infrastructure and Projects Authority estimates that approximately 61% of Government Major Projects Portfolio (GMPP) have been re-baselined between 31 March 2023 and 31 March 2024. This rate of change is explained by 3 reasons:

1. Major projects report a cost baseline that factors in inflation expectations. Each year these expectations have to be revised as inflation forecasts are revised, which in turn leads to a cost baseline revision.

2. Major projects are the most challenging, ambitious and innovative projects the UK has ever seen, with the scale and scope matching some of the biggest in the world. This challenge is therefore associated with a significant level of uncertainty, which leads to frequent cost baseline revision.

3. A large number of projects are at the pre-delivery stage, where they are expected, and encouraged, to change their baseline when they are in order to ensure that their plans are correctly set out at the delivery stage.