Public Sector: Procurement

(asked on 4th March 2025) - View Source

Question to the Cabinet Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the answer by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent on 18 February (HL4855), on what grounds they determined 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 2015, and whether an assessment was conducted to ensure that this change did not distort competition or provide the incumbent contractor with an unfair advantage.


Answered by
Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent Portrait
Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent
Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)
This question was answered on 18th March 2025

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.

Reticulating Splines