Neil O’Brien MP (Conservative – Harborough, Oadby and Wigston) asked the Ministry of Defence how much was spent on Capita-provided medical vetting for armed forces personnel over the last decade.
Defence Minister Luke Pollard provided the following figures, expressed in millions of pounds by financial year:
| Financial Year | Spending (£ million) |
|---|---|
| 2014-15 | 175.730 |
| 2015-16 | 127.058 |
| 2016-17 | 134.476 |
| 2017-18 | 124.062 |
| 2018-19 | 115.435 |
| 2019-20 | 120.961 |
| 2020-21 | 132.124 |
| 2021-22 | 121.657 |
| 2022-23 | 121.028 |
| 2023-24 | 126.760 |
Pollard explained that the data, which covers the period from 2014-15 to 2023-24, reflects the Ministry’s long-term investment in medical vetting services provided by Capita—a key component in screening applicants for the armed forces.
This spending is part of the broader recruitment process that has faced ongoing scrutiny over delays and inefficiencies.
Neil O’Brien’s question comes amid continued concerns regarding the speed and cost-effectiveness of the recruitment pipeline. The figures show significant variation over the years, with the highest spending recorded in 2014-15 at £175.730 million, and lower spending levels in more recent years, suggesting adjustments in contract management and service delivery.
The Ministry has previously acknowledged the challenges within the recruitment process and continues to review measures to improve efficiency, aiming to reduce delays and secure better value for money in new contracts.
A worryingly large amount of money.
That money would historically have been spent on service medics who would have been deployable.
Now the money is spent with CRAPITA on a nightmare system with very poor workflows and outcomes.
Hopefully this is one of the things that will be addressed in the SDSR, and the government will sack them.
They’ve failed recruitment targets every year since they were brought on; surely that’s enough breach of contract to justify termination of said contracts?
1.3 billion on screening thousands of applicants and turning them away for coughs and sneezes, too short, too fat.. etc
Money better spent elsewhere i think😡
Part of the problem. Parasites are everywhere.
Are you saying they all had tapeworms?? Headlice??
Who the heck were they employing for the vetting. Top surgeons and Consultants from the “private sector”. That is absolutely scandalous.
I know it was a long time ago, but when i had my medical back in 1977, it was in the careers office. Pee in a jar, drop my trousers and cough, couple of questions and all done in about 15 or 20 minutes.
I’ll bet a lot of it was spent on admin, chasing up GP medical records and the like.
Mine was 97, signed the paperwork at career office, couple of weeks for checks (didn’t help I had 3 Irish grandparents) then off to Lichfield for medical and fitness… God only knows why the messed up the simplicity of it..
Much of this medical ‘vetting’ is flawed. Many examples of applicants denied a military career because they once had acne or some other childhood/teenage ailments that were properly treated years ago.
Perhaps it is time for medical vetting to be relevant to an applicants or servicemans chosen trade. Does an RAF air mechanic need to be as physically ‘perfect’ as an Infantry soldier?
Well said !! If you ever take a look at some of the pictures and video’s of Ukrainian soldier’s and volunteers Its not 6ft, men and women with muscles, and super fit Infact its people from all ages and backgrounds, one eye, one arm, one leg, old and young with one goal.. defend Ukraine and adapt to front line needs No legs.. no worries well im going to train as a FPV operator and sit in the bunker hitting the 25 russian vehickles that are trying to break though the line Considering “future Soldier” … British army will be sat… Read more »
I’m not sure I’d scrap fitness levels completely but you’re right, I’m sure they could be loosened for specialisms where high fitness is frankly not essential. If we need to recruit a lot of people fairly quickly, then beggars can’t be choosers, particularly if they have knowledge or skills that are in demand. And you are absolutely right about the Ukrainians: it’s a joy to see how so many disparate-looking people have got stuck in to do their bit. A real citizen army, a new nation forged in war. Makes me go all misty-eyed.
Same old story just like for the NHS. Need a lightbulb? £2.00 from B&Q, need a lightbulb for the NHS? £125.00
I highlighted something similar on another thread where the ‘visually’ same ID card for the UK was going to cost £110 but cost Euros 30 in Latvia… and the Latvian card was chipped as well…
However much the MoD are spending on procurement and PRINCE 2 courses for CS etc, it is wasted money.
The old NHS lightbulb story..these come from contracts with contractors to replace lighting types, moving from old fluorescent bulbs to new LED systems, it included all the electrical work and safety requirements for a public building as will as working safely around patients and clinical services as they run..the NHS does not pay £125 for a light bulb.
No, but we do seem to pay over the odds for just about everything. A lot of companies are taking a lot of profit out of the system somewhere.
When I joined in 2006, I signed up a week later was seen by an MO, got the clear and 3 weeks later was in depot starting my training, less than a year from signing up I was passed out and in a battalion. This Capita agency is one of the main reasons the recruitment and retainment programme is failing. It now takes on average 18 months!!! to even get to depot. By the time someone gets their papers to go to depot they could in theory have a new job, lifestyle and other factors which might change their mind… Read more »
Yes, but those private companies give big kickbacks to politicians and senior officers. Snouts in the trough all over the place. And you’re right, the forces should take charge of their own recruitment again.
125-175 million a year..for recruitment health screening, the forces recruit about 15,000 people per year. That’s about £1200 per recruit…sorry but that’s insane…any healthcare provider should be able to screen for around £60 per person on a bulk contract. It shows the issue..there are around 140,000 applications per year, apparently almost 50% give up because of the year long wait, 10% recruitment from the pool is dire..you cannot tell me that only 10% of applicants are suitable for the armed forces…if they are medically screening all 140,000 knowing they will only recruit 15,000 that could explain the 175 million a… Read more »
Now you have broken its down further… yes its now even more insane 🙄😤
I wonder – how much per person?
How much per successful person?
Just another example of rip-off government contracts. Absolutely crazy. I wonder if these figures were questioned by the Defence Committee?
This is surely corruption on a grand scale with those responsible not keeping their eyes on the ball OR are actively benefiting perhaps?
I joined the Army in 1974 straight from school all that 2as required was entry into an Army Recruiting Office none of this pathetic capita crap