Lord Mandelson

Cameron Thomas Excerpts

Wednesday 4th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jeremy Corbyn]

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Following the answer we have just heard, if the Intelligence and Security Committee comes across evidence of commercial misdemeanours as well as intelligence and international relations misdemeanours, what powers does it have to do anything about that? Where will it refer those concerns and where will those inquiries lead? The issues of lobbying and potential corruption in the handing out of Government contracts are massive, and I would not want that swept under the carpet on the basis that the Committee is dealing with international relations and national security.

[Cameron Thomas (Tewkesbury) (LD)]

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. We have heard this evening from the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe), who celebrated Elon Musk—rather tactlessly, I believe—in this debate. Notwithstanding the fact that like Mandelson, Musk had a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, and in fact was found to have been practically begging for a visit to his island, the hon. Member declined to include—

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

Order. That is not a point of order; it is a point of debate. I do not think it is appropriate during points of order specifically on the Intelligence and Security Committee to raise that matter. It is not for the Chair to rule on comments by other Members during the course of the debate.

[Cameron Thomas]

I am grateful to you for allowing me to continue, Madam Speaker. The hon. Member for Great Yarmouth declined in his intervention to declare his interest: he is, in fact, bought and paid for by Elon Musk.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his point of order. He has very clearly brought into question the probity of the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe). He might want to withdraw that. It is of course a matter for the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth to declare that, which he could now do by putting any interest on the record.

--- Later in debate ---

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I did ask the Member to withdraw his comments. He now has the opportunity to do so.

[Cameron Thomas]

Madam Deputy Speaker, I withdraw the remark that the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth was bought and paid for. I regret the tone that I used.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I thank the hon. Member for putting that on the record. If there are no more points of order, I call Wendy Morton.

Civil Service Pension Scheme: Administration

Cameron Thomas Excerpts

Wednesday 4th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[Cameron Thomas (Tewkesbury) (LD)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. All credit to the hon. Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood (Lorraine Beavers) for securing this important debate. She can so often be found calling out injustice. As is clearly the case for many MPs, recent weeks have brought forth an abundance of correspondence from constituents frustrated by unsatisfactory communication from Capita, with the anxiety borne of missed pension payments. Many of those who have experienced missed pension payments have given years or even decades of their lives to public service across key Departments, not least the Ministry of Defence and Crown Prosecution Service.

One such constituent of mine expressed that she had completed her MyCSP application in July 2025, but had then received no further communication until discovering in November that the portal had closed. Having then created a Capita account in December, she has sent three messages via the portal and attempted to call the hotline four times—to date, all without a response. Another is a retired Ministry of Defence civil servant who had worked at RAF Innsworth, now Imjin barracks, home to the Joint Casualty and Compassionate Centre. She told me that she submitted all her documentation as required, but at the end of November all telephone lines were ceased, her emails bounced back undelivered and the portal was closed. She said that her experience only worsened when Capita reopened the portal, which was apparently untested and did not allow her to log in at all. The absence of meaningful communication significantly compounded my constituent’s stress. Those affected still have no timeline for seeing their pensions paid.

Capita’s initial explanation—that these symptoms were merely teething troubles—should do nothing to convince any of us that the organisation fully understands the implications of the missed payments. It has more recently admitted to serious issues: the true scale is apparently a backlog of 86,000 cases. None of that should surprise the Government or anybody else here. I recall significant delays in the armed forces recruitment process during a period in which Capita mismanaged medical assessments. Issues similar to those faced currently were reported in the administration of the teachers’ pension scheme, again by Capita. In October 2025, the Public Accounts Committee warned the Government of a clear risk that Capita would not be ready to take on full administration in December, and it called on the Cabinet Office to explain how it would ensure sufficient staffing and resourcing.

At the heart of this issue are 1.7 million current and former civil servants who just want peace of mind from knowing that the pensions they have earned through years of public service will be handled fairly, with dignity and, if at all possible, with a base level of competence. The Liberal Democrats therefore have questions for the Minister and the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire (Mike Wood). I hope that in their closing speeches, they will answer some of the following.

In the light of this situation, what steps are the Government taking to support individuals who have mortgages to pay, families to feed and all manner of expenses for which they are currently being denied payment? Perhaps the shadow Minister will tell us how his Government assessed Capita’s role in the administration of the teachers’ pension scheme, where similar issues were reported. Will he explain whether Capita’s role in the administration of the teachers’ pension scheme factored in the awarding of this contract? Capita claims that the backlog it inherited was more than twice the size that it anticipated. Will the Minister tell us who is responsible for that—MyCSP, Capita, this Government or the last one?

Perhaps the hon. Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire, the solitary Conservative representative, will answer the following. The value of the contract is £239 million over seven years. Given Capita’s history of mismanagement, by what metrics was it determined to have won the contract? Could the Minister answer this question? Hauntingly, the contract includes an option to extend it from seven to 10 years. Will this mismanagement factor into the Government’s determination about whether to extend it?

My final question is for the Government. We can all sit here, empathise and complain about Capita, but we must learn the lessons. What lessons will the Government take from this fiasco?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mike Wood]

I am sure that the hon. Lady will accept that because I was not a Minister in the previous Government, I did not have access to the tendering process, and do not have the details of the bid. However, there was a clear failure by the previous providers and there have been many opportunities since the last general election to review that contract in light of the clear failure—

[Cameron Thomas]

The hon. Gentleman is probably quite right to note that there were significant failings by the previous provider. Does he accept that there were clear failings by the previous Government?

[Mike Wood]

No. The hon. Gentleman is obviously trying to hide from the fact that his party was part of the Government that awarded that contract in 2012 to the mutual joint venture. He may wish to look at his own party’s part in that if he thinks that it was a mistake. Sadly, the information provided by the Minister for the Cabinet Office to the House last week fell well short of what is required. It failed to address the fundamental question of how the Government allowed Capita to take over the contract in December despite the repeated warnings and the signs that it had clearly failed in its key milestones.

UK-EU Common Understanding Negotiations

Cameron Thomas Excerpts

Wednesday 17th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. There are mutual benefits and mutual objectives—I am afraid to say that, in modern-day Europe, the UK and the EU also face mutual threats—and closer co-operation to deliver results is absolutely crucial.

[Cameron Thomas (Tewkesbury) (LD)]

This deal will not give back the futures that were stolen from so many young people by Boris Johnson’s Government, but it does offer such futures to people going forward. It is good work. That said, small, medium-sized and large businesses in Tewkesbury and the economy at large need the Government to stop fumbling around the edges. It is time for the Minister to speak to the Government and get us a customs union with the European Union, is it not?

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

It is time to deliver concrete results, and that is exactly what I am doing.

Digital ID

Cameron Thomas Excerpts

Monday 8th December 2025 Westminster Hall

[Robbie Moore]

I agree. The attitude of control strikes at the very heart of our political traditions. We are a representative democracy, not a command-and-control state. A Government exist by the will of the people, not the other way round. Put simply, we are not a “papers, please” society.

One of the most terrifying elements of the Government’s proposals is that these IDs are to be digital. The national database on which our identities are to be held is a true honeypot for hackers all over the world. To those who say that it will be secure, I say, “Name me a company or Government body that has not had a hacking crisis in recent years.” The NHS, the Co-op, Jaguar Land Rover—I could go on. Even Estonia’s Government lost 280,000 digital ID photos in 2021.

[Cameron Thomas (Tewkesbury) (LD)]

Does the hon. Gentleman share my concerns that the scheme could put constituents’ most sensitive data into the hands of private, perhaps overseas, individuals who might have neither our constituents’ nor our country’s interests at heart?

[Robbie Moore]

I completely agree. In the case of One Login, cyber-security specialists were able to infiltrate and potentially alter the underlying code without being noticed by the team working on the project. In fact, the existing system could be compromised as we speak. We are assured by advocates of digital ID that clever technology will protect the data, but as I have outlined, the temptation to further integrate data within the system will be extremely strong. How long before someone suggests that security features be removed to make the system more efficient?

Digital data brings me back to consent. I will finish on this point: digital ID is an ever more intrusive evolution of traditional ID cards—one that promises to be more oppressive. Coupled with the powers of digital databases, increasing widespread facial recognition, digitalised public services and the looming prospect of a central bank’s digital currencies, digital ID threatens to create an all-encompassing digital surveillance state that even George Orwell’s “Nineteen Eighty-Four” could not predict. In every aspect of public life, we give over our data with consent. Yet digital ID turns that notion on its head, insisting that we hand over data to simply function in society, and potentially for reasons to which we cannot consent in advance.

National Security Strategy

Cameron Thomas Excerpts

Tuesday 24th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Pat McFadden]

The hon. and learned Gentleman will be aware that there has been a common travel area between Ireland and the United Kingdom for many years, which the previous Government and this Government were determined to keep. That is why there is an open border between the two countries, as he says. I refer him to the immigration White Paper published just a few weeks ago, which set out reforms to the legal immigration system. Immigration makes an immense contribution to UK society, but we know that people want a proper set of rules around it, and that is what the immigration White Paper provides.

[Cameron Thomas (Tewkesbury) (LD)]

I echo the comments made by the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith) about the Chinese Communist party. The national security strategy recognises that UK security is tied to that of our allies. Do the Government acknowledge that lasting peace in Europe means terminating Putin’s European ambitions in Ukraine, and if so, how will the Government get that through to the US Administration?

[Pat McFadden]

Since the start of the Russia-Ukraine war, we have stood by Ukraine. The strategy sets out the degree of support that this country has given Ukraine over the past four years. We continue to stand by Ukraine, and we continue to support its right to decide its own future. That will remain a core part of our strategy. With regard to China, my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary will make a statement shortly setting out the China audit in greater detail.