Asked by: Lord Pack (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent on 3 March (HL14499), and further to the Statement by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent on 2 June (HL Deb col 756), what the terms are for the review of the use of non-corporate communications channels and, if they are not yet available, when they will be published.
Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Captain of the King's Bodyguard of the Yeomen of the Guard (HM Household) (Deputy Chief Whip, House of Lords)
The Terms of Reference for the Independent Review of Non-Corporate Communications Channels were published in full on 2 June on the Government website and are reproduced here for the benefit of their Lordships’ House:
TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW INTO THE USE OF NON-CORPORATE COMMUNICATION CHANNELS IN THE UK GOVERNMENT
Purpose of Review
1. To examine the use of ‘non-corporate communications channels’ (NCCCs) within the UK government.
2. To consider the behavioural, organisational, legal, and technological factors affecting the use of NCCCs.
3. To make practical recommendations concerning NCCC use with the aim of improving the quality, security, propriety, effectiveness, and efficiency of government decision-making and record-keeping.
Background
The current lack of clarity on the use of NCCCs within Government raises concerns about information security practices, transparency and record keeping. These concerns engage with the Government’s legal obligations and standards of conduct.
Scope & Definition
The communication behaviours and practices of all UK Ministers, Special Advisers and Civil Servants concerning Government business are within scope, as are the related behavioural, organisational, legal, and technological factors. Where appropriate, this will include communications with wider public sector officials, although the communications of local government and other public sector bodies are generally out of scope. The review will provide a formal definition of NCCCs. However, for the purposes of these Terms of Reference, NCCCs are defined as any means of communication (generally, but not exclusively, textual) not provided for by HMG, and that might be personally owned, externally hosted or managed.
● The review is to gather and consider evidence of actual NCCC practice, including but not restricted to:
○ patterns of use, misuse and abuse, at all levels
○ communications with external partners (domestic and international)
○ crisis communications
○ record creation, retention, deletion and disclosure, including the use of auto-deletion features
○ assessment of the quality and provision of guidance and training
○ threats posed to the security and integrity of Government communications, including interception or device compromise by hostile actors and risks arising from the jurisdiction in which platform data is held
● The review should consider the following in making its recommendations:
○ how to reduce the risk of data loss and data leaks through the use of NCCCs
○ the incentives and disincentives to good behaviour (e.g: discipline, Codes of Conduct, etc.)
○ the communications channels that are available on official systems and the impact on the use of NCCCs as alternatives
○ any necessary changes to the policy and accountability framework for NCCCs and information security
○ options for improving guidance and training on NCCCs and information security ○ how to preserve the legitimate operational benefits of fast, informal communication whilst managing the associated risks
○ the likely impact of recommendations on the efficiency and effectiveness of government business
○ the views of the Information Commissioner and the Keeper of Public Records.
Leadership and Governance
This is to be an independent review, conducted by a qualified senior public figure supported by a small team of serving officials. The lead reviewer will make a written report of their findings and recommendations to the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and the Security Minister jointly, copying the Prime Minister.
Timings
The reviewer will report in early 2027. The Government will publish the Review’s findings and present the Government’s response to Parliament in due course thereafter.
Method
This will be determined by the lead reviewer, but the review team will be expected to make use of previous reviews and studies, the technical literature, structured interviews, data analysis, observational studies, surveys in preparing their findings and recommendations. The review will also consider suitable international comparators and models of best practice drawn from other corporate settings. The review will be informed and, as appropriate, illustrated by specific examples of NCCC use.
Asked by: Lord Pack (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent on 18 June (HL580), what was the percentage of Key Performance Indicators on Capita contracts that fell into the 'inadequate' category or worse, for each of the last 16 quarters for which data is available.
Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Captain of the King's Bodyguard of the Yeomen of the Guard (HM Household) (Deputy Chief Whip, House of Lords)
The Commercial Playbooks require departments to publish key performance indicators (KPIs) on their most important contracts. Within the data generated through this mechanism, across the last 16 quarters, the average percentage of published KPIs with inadequate ratings on Capita contracts across all departments was 9%. 'Inadequate' is the lowest rating.
Asked by: Lord Pack (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what was the commercial value in the last year of products or services which are usually charged for but which were provided by X to the Government for free, such as in providing premium accounts to the government at no cost.
Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Captain of the King's Bodyguard of the Yeomen of the Guard (HM Household) (Deputy Chief Whip, House of Lords)
Decisions regarding subscriptions and the use of platform features are taken by individual teams within departments, and are not centrally managed.
Asked by: Lord Pack (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government how much they have spent in the last financial year on non-advertising services from X, such as in paying for premium subscriptions.
Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Captain of the King's Bodyguard of the Yeomen of the Guard (HM Household) (Deputy Chief Whip, House of Lords)
Decisions regarding subscriptions and the use of platform features are taken by individual teams within departments, and are not centrally managed.
Asked by: Lord Pack (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what is the wording of any standard email signatures appended to emails sent by those working in the Cabinet Office; when was the wording last reviewed; and who reviewed it.
Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Captain of the King's Bodyguard of the Yeomen of the Guard (HM Household) (Deputy Chief Whip, House of Lords)
The Government Communication Service brand guidance recommends a stylistic layout, but staff may add additional information where they see fit.
Examples of the stylistic layout are:
This guidance was last revised in October 2024 and is subject to continual review.
Asked by: Lord Pack (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to their response to the consultation on changes to the infected blood compensation scheme, published on 14 April, when they expect to bring forward legislative changes to the compensation scheme.
Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Captain of the King's Bodyguard of the Yeomen of the Guard (HM Household) (Deputy Chief Whip, House of Lords)
On 18 June 2026, the Government laid a fourth set of regulations. Subject to Parliamentary approval, these regulations will enact the changes made following the public consultation on the infected blood compensation scheme, and complete the Government’s response to the Inquiry’s July 2024 Additional Report.
Asked by: Lord Pack (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what is the wording of any standard email signatures appended to emails sent by those working in Downing Street; when was the wording last reviewed; and who reviewed it.
Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Captain of the King's Bodyguard of the Yeomen of the Guard (HM Household) (Deputy Chief Whip, House of Lords)
There is no standard email wording for Downing Street staff electronic signatures.
Asked by: Lord Pack (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to update the Cabinet Office Guide to making legislation to provide stronger guidance on the commencement of legislation, in particular the need to implement and commence all primary legislation; and whether they intend to provide guidance to departments on the need to keep uncommenced legislation under review.
Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Captain of the King's Bodyguard of the Yeomen of the Guard (HM Household) (Deputy Chief Whip, House of Lords)
The Cabinet Office Guide to Making Legislation is kept regularly under review, with the last update having been published on 10 September 2025. As highlighted in that version, commencement dates should be specified in the Act where possible and appropriate.
Royal Assent and Commencement is currently covered in Section F, Chapter 38 of the Guide. Cabinet Office will carefully consider any amendments to this guidance and the need for supplementary guidance to departments to regularly consider any uncommenced legislation.
Asked by: Lord Pack (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the response given by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent on 28 April (HL Deb col 1112), how many key performance indicators for Capita have been set in total across its government and public sector contracts; what the performance rankings are within those KPIs; and what proportion of KPIs fall into each of those performance rankings.
Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Captain of the King's Bodyguard of the Yeomen of the Guard (HM Household) (Deputy Chief Whip, House of Lords)
Performance data for 15 of the government's most important contracts with Capita is published quarterly.
In Q3 of Financial Year 2025/26, a total of 30 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) were reported against. The performance rankings and the proportion of KPIs falling into each ranking are as follows:
'Good': 26 KPIs (86.67%)
'Inadequate': 4 KPIs (13.33%)
Asked by: Lord Pack (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent on 9 June (HL581), (1) which companies are currently on the debarment list, and (2) whether each such company is listed as a company that either "must" or "may" be excluded from future contracts.
Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Captain of the King's Bodyguard of the Yeomen of the Guard (HM Household) (Deputy Chief Whip, House of Lords)
Under the Procurement Act 2023, suppliers may only be added to the debarment list by Ministerial decision, following an investigation conducted by the Debarment Review Service. This is a new power that came into force on 24 February 2025.
No suppliers are currently on the debarment list.