| Heading: |
Cabinet Office: KPMG |
| Question ID: |
1809556 |
| UIN: |
HL8106 |
| House: |
Lords |
| Date tabled: |
2025-06-04 |
| Asking Member ID: |
4567 |
| Asking Member display name: |
Baroness Finn
|
| Asking Member handle: |
|
| Asking Member Twitter reference: |
Baroness Finn
|
| Member interest: |
false |
| Question text: |
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent on 23 April (HL5835), whether they considered a bridging arrangement with an alternative supplier to KPMG before the extension of contract C2980; and if |
| Is named day: |
false |
| Date of holding answer: |
|
| Date answered: |
2025-06-18 |
| Date answer corrected: |
|
| Is holding answer: |
false |
| Is correcting answer: |
false |
| Answering Member ID: |
4508 |
| Answering Member display name: |
Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent
|
| Answering Member handle: |
RuthAnderson
|
| Answering Member Twitter reference: |
@RuthAnderson
|
| Correcting Member ID: |
|
| Correcting Member display name: |
|
| Correcting Member handle: |
|
| Correcting Member Twitter reference: |
|
| Answer text: |
Alternatives to a short-term contract extension were considered, and the decision to pursue a short-term extension without an increase to the contract value was taken based on this providing best value for money and other considerations (for example syste... |
| Original answer text: |
|
| Comparable answer text: |
|
| Answering body ID: |
53 |
| Answering body name: |
Cabinet Office |
| Tweeted: |
true |