Speeches by McKinnell.

“It is an honour to follow the right hon. Member for South West Wiltshire (Dr Murrison). It is clear that when it comes to defence readiness, there is much on which we can all agree. Let me also—before he leaves the Chamber—pay tribute to the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith), an…”

“That does not answer the question. Is it still the intention that all arm’s length bodies will join the shared services?”

“What do you mean by heavy lifting?”

“Okay, so the answer is no.”

“I want to ask you about the detail of the arm’s length bodies and joining service clusters, but in respect of the answer you just gave, to what extent have you looked at international comparisons and how other Governments do this? Internationally, all Governments must be transferring to new digital services. What examp…”

“I did not really understand the explanation of why it is more nuanced for the Treasury than for other Departments.”

“At this stage, are you still expecting all arm’s length bodies to join the shared service clusters?”

“Okay, that is helpful to understand although it creates some uncertainty as to the original intention and what is now developing. That goes to some of the points raised about how much this is ultimately going to cost and the outcome, given that the parameters seem to be shifting. I appreciate that some of that might be…”

“I think that answer has been given. I am trying to clarify whether that is a shift from the original policy. I understood that the intention was for all arm’s length bodies to be included, so I am just trying to understand whether that is no longer the intention—you have clarified that; thank you—and whether that is a …”

“What do you mean? Why should we not underestimate it?”

“I genuinely still don’t understand that. Can I just clarify why I am asking? It is unclear from the answers that you are giving what it is that is preventing the movement. Is it that the levers are not there to mandate Departments to do this? Is it because, actually, the strategy is wrong and needs revisited, and this …”

“Presumably the value-for-money judgment is a timing one—“when”, rather than “whether”. All these systems will need updating and investing in, so presumably we are talking timeline. Either the strategy is for the Government to be on the same system or it is not. I think that was the original strategy, but I am not clear…”

“The Treasury is just an example; if the Treasury itself is not doing it, why is the rest of the Government theoretically being mandated to do this—if the Treasury itself has decided that, on a value-for-money basis, the case has not been made?”

“But clearly a decision is being made that it is value for money for other Departments, but not for the Treasury in that circumstance.”

“My understanding is that the Treasury has not committed to onboarding its shared services. Given that the Treasury is funding this transformation and the onboarding of shared services, how do you square that circle?”

“I’m sorry, I am really struggling to understand that. The Treasury is clearly funding this programme, so I struggle to understand how it can be expected of other Departments and other arm’s-length bodies, yet there are still value-for-money considerations being applied at this stage. Either it is the strategy or it is …”

“What timescale are you judging that against? This is a long-term transformation. Are you talking short, medium or long-term value for money? How are you judging that?”

“We know it’s complex; you’ve said that quite a few times.”

“So it has been deemed essential for all Departments except the Treasury at this stage?”

“That makes more sense. Thank you; that helps. I will hand back to the Chair, but overall, at the moment, it feels like the original strategy is being revised and revisited on a value-for-money and case-by-case basis. There perhaps needs to be a revisit of whether the original strategy still applies, because at this sta…”