Lord Agnew of Oulton

This information is not held by the Cabinet Office.

It is the responsibility of individual customer departments to publish their contracting information.

The anticipated time commitments for the various posts are as follows:

• Chair of the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments - two to three days per month

• First Civil Service Commissioner - three days per week

• Commissioner for Public Appointments - two days per week

• Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards - the time commitment is unspecified and varies according to workload

• Chair of the Senior Salaries Review Body - on average, 25 days per year

• Chair of the Security Vetting Appeals Panel - 40 days per year

IBCA continues to work closely with the Public Sector Fraud Authority to undertake Fraud Risk Assessments and then to implement appropriate counter-fraud mitigations and controls. I refer noble Lords to my answer (HL5057) on 6 March.

An arm’s-length body (ALB) is formally sponsored by a single department, with accountability provided through a responsible Accounting Officer. While some ALBs maintain important policy relationships with multiple government departments, this is typically governed by Memoranda of Understanding or defined in their Framework Documents. The Cabinet Office does not keep a central record of these relationships.

The previous administration did not update this list prior to the General Election. The Cabinet Office will publish a new 2025 list in due course.

Details of central government contracts above £12,000 for procurements commenced before 24 February 2025 are published on Contracts Finder. Contracts procured under the Procurement Act 2023 above £12,000 inc VAT are published on the Central Digital Platform Find a Tender service. The details published online include whether each contract was let through competitive tendering or via direct award.

Conducting a detailed analysis of contracts awarded, specifically tailored to the parameters requested, would incur a disproportionate cost to the department.

As with standard Senior Civil Service contracts, the employer and/or the employee can terminate employment by giving notice. This is compatible with the civil service management code.

Mean and median salaries for civil servants are published for delegated grades as part of the Civil Service Statistics publication, and for SCS paybands as part of the Government Evidence to the Senior Salaries Review Body. Figures on estimated total costs are not routinely published.

Information at this level of detail is not held by the Cabinet Office. The ALB landscape analysis captures data on ALB locations by region, and can be found on gov.uk here. Sponsoring departments will be able to provide more precise location information for individual ALBs.

As part of the Places for Growth programme, the Cabinet Office engages with departments that have arm's-length bodies (ALBs) based in London, to encourage them to be located outside of London, increasing the geographic diversity of the Civil Service. In addition, newly created bodies are not headquartered in London, unless there are exceptional circumstances which mean this is necessary.

Assessing what constitutes a project's original baseline would require making a case by case assessment for each of the 227 major projects in order to determine which baseline should be used as a reference point. Making this case by case assessment would have exceeded the current disproportionate cost threshold as set out in the Guide to Parliamentary Work. We have no plans to place a copy of this assessment in the Library of the House.

Since 2005, His Majesty’s Government has established 18 non-statutory inquiries.

The Cabinet Office collects data on the duration and cost of inquiries from departments, inquiries’ own reports, and other publicly available information. We do not centrally hold data on the projected costs of each inquiry as each Government Department is responsible for the inquiries they sponsor.

We have provided details on all non statutory inquiries established since 2005 in the table below. In the table below, “unknown” means that it is not known by Cabinet Office.

For 2024/2025, Royal Fleet Auxiliary, Trinity House, and UK Atomic Energy Authority have had business cases for Pay Flexibility approved. HM Revenue and Customs and UK Health and Safety Authority were also approved to adopt the Government Digital and Data pay framework.

The Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA) is committed to being open and transparent, however, fraud risk assessments are sensitive documents, therefore they are not intended for public release.

There is no unpublished internal guidance on the performance management process for Permanent Secretaries. The process follows the principles outlined in the performance management guidance for Senior Civil Servants which is published on GOV.UK: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/67a391127da1f1ac64e5ff25/Final_2025-26_SCS_PM_Framework_published.pdf

The Cabinet Secretariat works on behalf of the Cabinet Secretary to support Cabinet committees. The Cabinet Office has no plans to place a list of all the officials working in the Secretariat in the Library of the House.

Since 2014, permanent secretary appointments have been made on the basis of a five year fixed tenure; this is set out in contracts of employment. There is no automatic presumption in favour of renewal, but renewals are possible at the discretion of the Prime Minister.

The table below sets out the tenure end dates of the current permanent secretary group.

*Andrew Goodall is on secondment from NHS Wales

**Andy Start is on a Fixed Term contract

*** Tamara Finkelstein, Jenny Harries and Sarah Munby are leaving the Civil Service in Summer 2025, and therefore before their tenure end date

The National Procurement Policy Statement and Procurement Policy Note 002, as Cabinet Office policies, are not subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.9 of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Office for Budget Responsibility, HM Treasury, the Department for Work & Pensions, and HM Revenue & Customs, published on 9 November 2023.

An impact assessment in relation to the Procurement Act and associated reforms was published in May 2022 and can be found at: https://bills.parliament.uk/publications/46429/documents/1767

Central government uses the same tool for assessing social value that has been used since 2021, where central government buyers select evaluation criteria from the options available in the social value model.

The updates made to the social value model have streamlined the content, aligning it to the government's missions. This ensures social value reinforces policy delivery and does not add additional requirements.

When in scope contracting authorities are choosing evaluation criteria from the model they must ensure the criteria are proportionate and relevant to the contract in question. Suppliers then have the flexibility to choose solutions that suit them. The updated guidance emphasises the importance of pre-market engagement to ensure the criteria selected are appropriate for the contract.

Concerns regarding the Civil Service, Ministerial or Special Adviser Codes should be escalated via line management chains, and to the Permanent Secretary’s (or Head of Department’s) office where necessary. Concerns can then be escalated to the Cabinet Office where the Department considers it necessary.

As set out in the Civil Service Code, concerns in relation to that Code can also be raised with the relevant department's nominated officers who have been appointed to advise staff on the code.

The Procurement Review Unit has 13 permanent full time equivalent roles in the unit. The unit is supported by a flexible resource model where additional resources can be allocated to the unit as required. Currently the team is being supported by 4 flexible members of staff.

Cabinet committees are supported by the relevant Secretariat that sit across the Economic and Domestic Secretariat, the National Security Secretariat and the European and Global Issues Secretariat as most relevant according to the Terms of Reference of the committee.

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.