Oral Answers to Questions
Leigh Ingham Excerpts(1 week, 2 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Dan Jarvis
I agree with the comments from the Secretary-General of NATO that the hon. Lady cited. From previous conversations that we have had, I think she understands the seriousness we attach to those issues. The Cabinet Office co-ordinates a whole-of-Government response and we work closely on those issues with partners, including in the Ministry of Defence. She is right about the need to communicate those issues to the public, and we are looking at how we can do that most effectively.
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Chris Ward)
As I have said, this Government do not believe that our procurement rules do enough to back British businesses. That is why I have announced steps to address that, and to simplify and open up the system to small and medium-sized enterprises, start-ups and charities. We will issue new guidance shortly to ensure that the procurement regime always serves the national interest.
Leigh Ingham
Happy St George’s day, Mr Speaker. GE Vernova, in my constituency of Stafford, Eccleshall and the villages, is creating 400 new jobs to add to the 1,400 people it already employs. I believe that companies like this, which are already backing Britain by investing here, should be given more consideration when they are competing for Government contracts. Can the Minister assure me that when UK Government money is being spent, particularly in industries that are key to our national security such as energy, we will prioritise those companies already investing in British manufacturing, British skills and British jobs?
Chris Ward
My hon. Friend is spot on, and I thank her for championing her local business while making a bigger point about how we need to support British jobs more widely. We have set out what we are going to do in four sectors, including energy infrastructure, but I agree that we need to go further and look at what more we can do in particular to support our manufacturing industry, and hopefully we will keep working to do that.
Government Procurement Strategy
Leigh Ingham Excerpts(1 week, 3 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
(Urgent Question): To ask the Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office if he will make a statement on the Government procurement strategy.
The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Chris Ward)
Every year this country spends around £400 billion of taxpayers’ money on procurement—and, if we are honest, under the current complex system, we do not always spend it as wisely as we could. That is why just before the Easter recess I announced a major package of reforms to the procurement system, on which I am grateful to have the chance to update the House today. Behind these reforms are three principles: first, that procurement should do much more to protect national security and support British businesses; secondly, that it should deliver a fairer economy; and, thirdly, that it should be simpler, fairer, and open doors to small businesses and charities. Let me address those principles in turn.
This Government believe it matters where things are made and who makes them, so we will issue new guidance for all Government Departments to make use of the national security exemptions in the Procurement Act 2023 to direct procurement to serve the national interest. We will start with four sectors critical to our national security: steel, shipbuilding, energy independence and AI. That will give a clear sign that this Labour Government will back British business, and will use both the weight of our procurement budget and the powers in the Procurement Act to do so. We will also take two further steps to back British businesses. First, Government Departments will now be required to confirm whether prime contractors are using UK steel, and if they are not doing so, they will have to explain why. We will also develop a new shipbuilding framework to restrict Government contracts to British firms where this supports our national security interests.
The second principle of these reforms is that procurement should build a fairer economy, and the truth is that for decades, under successive Governments, we have had a policy that essentially adds up to outsourcing by default. Under this Labour Government, the age of outsourcing will end. We will, in line with our manifesto, introduce a public interest test, which will apply to all Government Departments. They will now be required to assess whether a service can be delivered more effectively in-house, and if it cannot, a clear explanation must be published. Departments will also for the first time be required to publish robust insourcing strategies, setting out how, over the medium term, they will build the capacity to make the biggest wave of insourcing in a generation a reality. This marks a step change in how and who our public services are run by and for, and I am proud that this Labour Government are delivering it.
We will also strengthen the role of social value in procurement. Too often, this has become a mere tick-box exercise and a barrier, not an opportunity, for SMEs and start-ups. Working with trade unions, businesses and others, we will create a new definition of social value that will underpin all Government procurement.
The third principle of these reforms is to make the procurement system simpler and fairer. I have heard too many times how the complexity, duplication and endless form-filling of the current system is among the biggest barriers to SMEs and charities, so we will undertake a rapid review of all existing requirements in the procurement system, and we will see which burdens and duplications can be removed. If they are not essential, we will scrap them. We will enforce a “tell us once” principle—
Chris Ward
I can only apologise, Mr Speaker.
In conclusion, these reforms will back British businesses and workers, build a fair economy, and simplify and open up our Government procurement system. There is still much to do, but this is a big step forward and I am grateful to have had the chance to set it out to the House today.
Leigh Ingham
Through a change in procurement policy that is more focused on backing British businesses, investing in Britain to help secure thousands of good, unionised jobs, and remaining community-focused, the Government will make sure that local people are reaping the full rewards from this move. I welcome it, and I welcome the Minister’s response to my urgent question. Could he please outline the first steps to deliver this procurement reform, and what it will mean for manufacturers in my constituency and in constituencies around the UK?
Chris Ward
My hon. Friend has raised the importance of changing the procurement rules with me a number of times—she is a tremendous champion on this. On next steps, the Cabinet Office is working on new guidance that we will put before the House very shortly—I hope before the summer recess—which will make flesh the commitments I have made today. As I say, it has three big principles behind it: backing British businesses, creating a fairer economy and making the system simpler and fairer for all.
Civil Service Pension Scheme: Administration
Leigh Ingham Excerpts(2 months, 4 weeks ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood (Lorraine Beavers) for securing this vital debate. As some of my colleagues have already done, I will speak about the human cost of the failures in the administration of the civil service pension scheme, and I will do so with the permission of constituents whose MyCSP cases have been handed over to Capita.
Sally Clementson was a civil servant who had paid into her pension throughout her working life. Sadly, she died in January last year. Her husband, Mark, waited months following her bereavement claim without hearing anything about the widower’s pension. During that time he was anxious, and suffered distress and serious financial hardship while grieving for his wife. Tragically, Mark himself died in November, having never received a penny of the pension that his wife had earned. To this day, his family have received no pension payments to help cover the funeral costs or mounting bills. The latest response that they received from Capita states that that is due to the backlog.
That is not an isolated case. Another constituent, Debbie Bowen, died in 2024. Her sister, Joanne Wilson, has spent over a year chasing Debbie’s pension. Solicitors were promised escalation and contact within 12 weeks, but alas no contact came. Repeated calls throughout December and January led to the same assurances, but still no resolution. Joanne has described feeling utterly frustrated and just worn down by it all.
Let me be clear: these are not complex claims. I know that many Members here have some really complex claims to deal with. The ones I am referring to are not disputed claims. They are from bereaved families, who are being left without answers, without dignity and without money. To be absolutely frank, I am apoplectic. It is unacceptable for workers or families to be left in this position.
Let me echo colleagues by asking the Minister: what immediate steps are being taken to prioritise bereavement cases? More broadly, when companies such as Capita repeatedly fail public services—let us be frank; it has done that not just in relation to pension schemes—why is that not considered during procurement processes? I used to work in procurement, and I certainly considered previous performance when I was awarding contracts. It is baffling to me that a contract was awarded to Capita when it had such a record of non-performance. Will the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire (Mike Wood), say why that was not considered when the previous Government awarded the contract?
Mike Wood
I have already given way twice and I may give way later, but I need to get through my speech so that the Minister can reply, because I know that hon. Members will want to hear her response.
Philippa retired in May and suffered a nervous collapse triggered by pension delay. Tragically, Philippa died on Boxing day, so that is the very real human cost. Of course, the National Audit Office report did not stop with the failings of the final years of MyCSP’s contract. It also highlighted that Capita had failed to meet three of the six key transition milestones that were due by March 2025, all relating to scheme design and operational readiness. In other words, the warning signs were there in black and white. Ministers were on notice of the potential for serious problems, and of the consequences that those problems would have for pensioners, for at least the final half of 2025.
Leigh Ingham
Does the hon. Member agree that the warning signs were there when Capita failed on the TPS?
Oral Answers to Questions
Leigh Ingham Excerpts(9 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Pat McFadden
As I said a few moments ago, the recent cyber-attacks have been a wake-up call to Government, business and the whole of society. This is part of our national defence, and it is taken extremely seriously. The National Cyber Security Centre works with victims of these attacks and gives advice in peacetime, as it were, as to how businesses can best defend themselves against these rogue operators who try to extort them.
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
I was recently made aware by GE Vernova that its UK-based, lower-cost bid for the eastern green link 3 was passed over in favour of a higher-cost overseas supplier. Would the Minister meet me and GE Vernova to discuss current procurement policy and whether it does enough to support UK manufacturing and to ensure our energy security and net zero commitments?
Government Resilience Action Plan
Leigh Ingham Excerpts(9 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Pat McFadden
The preparations should take everything into account.
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for the statement. I welcome the announcement that the Government will undertake a full national test of the emergency alert system in September. How will they ensure that rural areas such as Church Eaton in my constituency, which is still waiting for its phone mast to be activated, and Maer, which has had long-term difficulties with mobile reception, can receive the message? My understanding is that the alert is dependent on 4G access.
Pat McFadden
My hon. Friend is right. About 95% of the population is covered by 4G or 5G access, and we are working constantly with the telecoms companies to improve that coverage. That is an ongoing effort.
Oral Answers to Questions
Leigh Ingham Excerpts(1 year, 2 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Fleur Anderson
We are working to narrow the range of products that involve a problem, but we are working in respect of each of them as well. The matter is being given consideration in the knowledge that, as the hon. Member has pointed out, the deadline is approaching.
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
The Windsor framework was a distinct improvement on the old Northern Ireland protocol, but does the Minister agree that if we are to ensure the smoothest possible movement of agrifood products across the Irish sea, it is vital that we secure a sanitary and phytosanitary agreement with the European Union?
Fleur Anderson
I agree that the Windsor framework is a big improvement on the protocol. We are committed to implementing it at the same time as seeking to negotiate an SPS agreement that would provide further improvements in the movement of agrifood products, and we must pave the way to that by resetting our relationship with the EU and implementing the Windsor framework in good faith.
Infected Blood Compensation Scheme
Leigh Ingham Excerpts(1 year, 2 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Nick Thomas-Symonds
On the hon. Gentleman’s first point, he mentioned me and my colleagues, but of course IBCA is an arm’s length body—it is operationally independent—so it takes operationally independent decisions on how best to pay out the money to as many people as possible, as quickly as possible. As I said, it has decided to adopt a test-and-learn approach to make that possible.
One of Sir Brian Langstaff’s recommendations is that we look at support for voluntary organisations. That will be covered in an update that I will give to the House in due course on all 12 recommendations. However, I give the hon. Gentleman the general assurance that I am, and will continue to be, restless for progress. On his point about IBCA scaling up and having more staff and claims managers, that is precisely what it is doing at the moment.
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for his statement and update. In Stafford, Eccleshall and the villages, I have a constituent, Janet, who is in her 80s. She tragically lost her first and second husband to infected blood, and she is due to receive compensation as their next of kin. She would like to ensure that she can pass the payments on to their children, who, as the Minister rightly said, are victims, too. However, she has been advised that if that happened, it would constitute a secondary transfer and be subject to inheritance tax. We are talking about people who lost their father and stepfather to this issue. Will he meet me to explore whether a solution can be found in these cases?
Nick Thomas-Symonds
First, I should say for clarity that all IBCA payments made to those in the UK will be exempt from income tax, capital gains tax and inheritance tax. Anyone who is in direct receipt of compensation from IBCA, or is a beneficiary of an estate to which compensation was paid on behalf of the deceased, does not need to pay income tax, capital gains tax or inheritance tax on the amount that they receive. I am aware of the concern that my hon. Friend is talking about; that is a slightly different situation. If she writes to me with the details of the case, I will be more than happy to look into it.
Oral Answers to Questions
Leigh Ingham Excerpts(1 year, 3 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
We have put more money into colleges and, as the hon. Lady knows, it is for them to deal with these disputes.
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
The Prime Minister
My sympathies go to my hon. Friend’s constituents; far too many are experiencing terrible flooding. I visited Stafford last year, and they talked me through the misery of their experience. We inherited flood defences in their worst condition on record. We are now investing £2.4 million in flood defences to better protect communities, and we have committed £60 million to support farmers impacted by extreme weather.