HL Deb 16 June 2003 vol 649 cc521-2

2.47 p.m.

Lord Corbett of Castle Vale asked Her Majesty's Government:

What additional payments have been made to Capita in respect of changes to requirements made by the Government after the contract for processing applications to the Criminal Records Bureau was signed.

The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Scotland of Asthal)

My Lords, since the contract for processing disclosure applications to the Criminal Records Bureau was signed in August 2000, a total of £23.7 million has been paid to Capita in respect of changes to requirements. These are part of the normal contract changes that are to be expected with any green-field contract of this scale. Of the figure, £19 million is accounted for by payments for the introduction of the paper-based application process, for enhanced quality assurance and for system testing prior to the launch, and for the setting up of the second site at Darwen to ensure business continuity.

Lord Corbett of Castle Vale

My Lords, I give a half-thanks to my noble friend for that response. Can she tell me why the Government did not disclose the fact that a compensation payment of £8.4 million had been made to Capita after the Home Office made sudden changes to the original contract for the Criminal Records Bureau? Is it not unacceptable that users should face a doubling of the charges made for checks to clear up the mess made by the Home Office without any date being set for introducing the 10 million a year basic checks that are expected to provide most of the income of the CRB? Further, can she guarantee that those teachers needing checks to take up new jobs this autumn will receive them without a repeat of the shambles last year?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, can I say straightaway that the arrangements which have been put in place in relation to teachers are now robust? Of course we accept that when the new procedure was introduced we did not see the response we would have expected.

The total amount paid to Capita as at the end of January last was £42.7 million, which includes the £23.7 million for the contract changes. When the contract was awarded, we predicted the total contract value over 10 years to be £400 million, although that is clearly demand dependent.

Changes have been made and we believe that those changes are the right ones. Further, I can tell noble Lords that the procedure is now working far better than it did when it was first introduced.

Lord Dholakia

My Lords, can the Minister confirm that of the target set with Capita of dealing with 95 per cent of cases within one week by March, only 20 per cent has been achieved? Seven out of eight targets have not been reached. Why is it necessary to hike up the fees by more than 300 per cent when there has been an utter failure on the part of those who administer the Criminal Records Bureau?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, I do not accept that there has been an utter failure. The disclosure fee is determined by a combination of CRB costs and the volume of applications. Despite the increase in capacity in recent months the unit cost of producing disclosures remains higher than the initial estimate, which informed the decision to set the original fee at £12. This is mainly because of the deferment of the introduction of basic disclosures, which has meant that the volume of disclosures issued has been less than forecast, thereby pushing up the unit cost of producing each disclosure. Other factors have also impinged upon the decision.

Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts

My Lords, are any further extensions of the remit of the Criminal Records Bureau planned for the future?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, I am not sure what the noble Lord means by "further extensions". The enhanced provision that we have now is far better than we have ever had before. We now have an opportunity to achieve a joined-up approach to these matters. We wish to introduce further checks and we shall look at such matters as quickly as we are able to do so.