We asked the Home Office why it had not submitted to competition five of the contracts relating to the new sites, worth £243 million of the £253 million it had spent through contracts. The Home Office told us that it used framework agreements for some 18 Q 159; HM Treasury, Dear Accounting Officer Letter – Parliamentary Communications, 16 January 2024 19 Qq 179, 203; C&AG’s Report, Asylum accommodation, Figure 5 and Figure 6 20 Qq 166–167; C&AG’s Report, Asylum accommodation, Figure 7 21 Qq 1...

We asked the Home Office why it had not submitted to competition five of the contracts relating to the new sites, worth £243 million of the £253 million it had spent through contracts. The Home Office told us that it used framework agreements for some 18 Q 159; HM Treasury, Dear Accounting Officer Letter – Parliamentary Communications, 16 January 2024 19 Qq 179, 203; C&AG’s Report, Asylum accommodation, Figure 5 and Figure 6 20 Qq 166–167; C&AG’s Report, Asylum accommodation, Figure 7 21 Qq 170–173, 177, 198, 202 12 Asylum Accommodation and UK-Rwanda partnership contracts, which would have had a competition for the initial framework. It again Type: conclusion | Number: 14 | Response status: not_addressed Government response: 2.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Recommendation implemented 2.2 A raft of measures has been implemented to address weaknesses. The programme was recently restructured to deliver smaller sites, requiring lighter touch refurbishment an