The UK government has confirmed that Fujitsu has pledged not to pursue deals with new public sector customers through frameworks potentially valued at billions of pounds while its voluntary bidding pause stays in effect. Cabinet Office Parliamentary Secretary Mark Ferguson wrote to MPs this week outlining assurances from the Japanese supplier, which has been embroiled in the Post Office Horizon scandal—described as one of the most severe miscarriages of justice in modern times.
Fujitsu secured positions on three government frameworks despite announcing in January 2024 that it would stop bidding for contracts with new government customers until the public inquiry into the Horizon scandal wrapped up. The company won a spot on the Digital Outcomes and Specialists 7 framework, valued at up to £14.9 billion, along with places on the Technology Services 4 framework worth up to £19.08 billion and the Transport Technology framework worth around £2.3 billion. Between 1999 and 2015, the Post Office prosecuted 700 subpostmasters in cases where Horizon evidence may have been used, while nearly 300 additional cases were brought by other agencies. Hundreds faced wrongful convictions, shattering lives in the process, and the inquiry's first report indicated that relatives of at least 13 individuals believed their deaths by suicide were connected to their experiences with Horizon and the Post Office.
Ferguson stated that Fujitsu has assured the Government Commercial Agency—the Cabinet Office body managing the frameworks—that its voluntary pause fully applies to contract opportunities arising through its participation on government frameworks. The Parliamentary Secretary added that the agency monitors Fujitsu's compliance with its self-imposed bidding restrictions and maintains regular contact with the company to oversee its framework activity. "To date, GCA can confirm that Fujitsu have kept to these self-imposed restrictions," Ferguson wrote. House of Commons Business and Trade Committee chair Liam Byrne had written to the government seeking assurance that Fujitsu wouldn't use its framework positions to pursue work from new public sector customers after the company secured the three spots.
The assurances come after questions arose about how Fujitsu's moratorium works in practice. In April 2025, reports emerged that Fujitsu had won a £125 million contract to build Northern Ireland's new land registry system for the Department of Finance—a new government customer—more than a year after its voluntary pause began. Fujitsu explained it had been named preferred bidder for that contract in 2023, before the voluntary restrictions took effect. The company's 2024 letter said it would assess its continued involvement in procurements already underway when the pause started, though it also said Fujitsu would bid for work with a new government customer only if asked to do so. The Northern Ireland government later confirmed to The Register that it hadn't asked the company to continue bidding, and Ferguson's letter doesn't explain how that award squared with Fujitsu's commitment.
Ferguson's letter marks the government's first public accounting of how it intends to police Fujitsu's voluntary restrictions across the procurement landscape. Frameworks serve as procurement vehicles that allow public bodies to buy from pre-approved suppliers under agreed terms, though a place on one doesn't guarantee any work, and the Government Commercial Agency receives a 1 percent levy on sales made through these arrangements. The ongoing statutory inquiry into the Horizon scandal, launched in 2021, continues to examine how the flawed EPOS and back-end finance system—first rolled out in the 1990s by ICL, a UK tech firm majority-owned and later fully acquired by Fujitsu in 1998—led to devastating prosecutions based on evidence that may have been compromised. The government's reliance on Fujitsu's self-policing reflects a broader tension in public procurement: how to balance accountability for past failures with the practical need to work with major suppliers who hold deep technical expertise and existing contracts. For decision-makers watching this space, the real test will be whether voluntary commitments backed by agency monitoring prove sufficient, or whether stricter enforcement mechanisms become necessary when billions in framework value hang in the balance.