Key Points
- Barnet Labour announced that the “era of mass outsourcing is coming to an end” following the conclusion of long-term contracts delivered by private outsourcing giant Capita.
- Key local services, including Information Technology (IT) and website provision, officially returned to in-house management on Thursday, 1st October.
- Labour claims the municipal council spent over £500 million on outsourced contracts, which ultimately overran initial budget expectations by £200 million.
- Council Leader Barry Rawlings stated that previous Conservative administrations surrendered strategic control, whereas Labour is restoring direct governance to handle current financial pressures.
- Conservative opposition leader Peter Zinkin accused Labour of a “desperate attempt to rewrite history”, arguing Labour merely allowed expiring contracts to end while continuing to hand other large contracts to external providers.
Barnet (North London News) October 6, 2026 — Barnet Labour celebrated “taking back control” of local municipal services following the expiration of major contracts delivered by external outsourcing corporation Capita, as local Conservative opposition members accused the council administration of a “desperate attempt to rewrite history”.
What led to the end of Capita’s outsourcing era in Barnet?
During the early 2010s, the previous Conservative administration in Barnet adopted a civic delivery framework dubbed “EasyCouncil”. Under this model, a wide range of municipal functions—spanning back-office operations, planning, highways, and public-facing digital services—were handed over to the multinational contractor Capita under long-term multi-million-pound contracts.
In an official public statement released on Thursday, 1st October—marking the exact date the borough’s Information Technology (IT) and official website provision were formally returned to in-house management—Barnet Labour declared that “the era of mass outsourcing is coming to an end at the local authority”.
As reported by David Floyd of the Barnet Post, the local Labour administration released detailed financial claims regarding the long-term cost of the outsourced arrangements. Labour stated:
“Barnet Council ended up spending more than half a billion pounds – some of which would have gone to shareholders’ dividends – to let go of services from planning to highways”.
The administration added:
“The contract overran its costs, culminating in a bill for council taxpayers of £200 million more than originally expected”.
Hailing the formal transition of services back to public control, Council Leader Barry Rawlings emphasised the shift in strategic direction. As reported by David Floyd of the Barnet Post, Councillor Barry Rawlings stated:
“Under the Conservatives, Barnet council let go of control of a long-term strategic vision for the council, and lost the opportunity to prepare for the severe financial challenges of today”.
Councillor Rawlings added:
“Labour has taken back control and will ensure that we can find our way through these difficult conditions, with a council that is truly responsive to residents”.
How has the Conservative opposition responded to Labour’s claims?
The Conservative political opposition within the London Borough of Barnet firmly rejected Labour’s framing of the service transfer.
As reported by David Floyd of the Barnet Post, Conservative opposition leader Peter Zinkin challenged the administration’s narrative, stating:
“This is a desperate attempt by Barnet Labour to rewrite history”.
Councillor Peter Zinkin told the Barnet Post that Labour was simply taking credit for the natural conclusion of multi-year agreements:
“Labour are celebrating the return of services in-house, but only because the outsourcing arrangements they inherited were coming to an end and their own replacement strategy fell apart. If Labour truly believed outsourcing was wrong, they would have ended it years ago”.
Expanding on the opposition’s critique, Councillor Zinkin contended that external procurement remains active within the local authority. As reported by David Floyd of the Barnet Post, Councillor Peter Zinkin stated:
“Instead, the reality is that Labour promised to bring services back in-house but has continued to hand large contracts to external providers. The continued use of outsourced arrangements shows that Labour has not ended outsourcing at all. They have simply changed who receives the contract”.
Addressing the ultimate standards by which the council’s performance will be evaluated by local voters, Councillor Zinkin remarked:
“What residents will judge is not who employs the staff, but whether services improve, whether money is spent wisely and whether council tax remains affordable”.
He concluded:
“After four years in charge, Barnet Labour cannot keep blaming their predecessors. They should now own the decisions, the contracts and the results”.
Background of the Capita Outsourcing Strategy in Barnet
The debate surrounding municipal service delivery in the London Borough of Barnet dates back to the implementation of the “EasyCouncil” model in the late 2000s and early 2010s. Spearheaded by the then Conservative-led administration, the council sought to restructure local government operations by scaling back directly employed staff and outsourcing primary civic and administrative functions to private enterprise.
In 2013, Barnet Council signed two massive ten-year contracts with Capita, valued together at roughly £500 million. The first contract, known as Customer and Support Group (CSG), covered back-office infrastructure including IT, finance, human resources, customer service, and revenues and benefits. The second contract, Development and Regulatory Services (DRS), delegated statutory functions such as planning, building control, highways, regeneration, and environmental health to the contractor.
Over the decade-long tenure of these contracts, the outsourcing model faced significant scrutiny from local residents, trade unions such as Barnet UNISON, and political opponents. Concerns were repeatedly raised regarding service oversight, contract management fees, and unexpected budget overruns. A high-profile financial fraud case involving a former contractor employee further intensified local debates over the auditing and direct accountability of third-party vendors. Following local electoral shifts in May 2022, when Labour gained control of Barnet Council, the administration initiated plans to review expiring Capita contracts and evaluate which council services should be insourced upon contract termination.
Prediction: How this development will affect Barnet residents and council taxpayers
The return of IT, website operations, and administrative functions from Capita back to direct public control marks a structural shift in how Barnet Council delivers core municipal services. This development will affect local residents, taxpayers, and municipal staff in several key ways:
- Operational Continuity and Service Reliability: For local residents accessing online municipal services, the primary immediate benchmark will be system stability. In-house management gives council officers direct oversight over digital platforms and infrastructure. However, smooth transitions depend on the effective operational transfer of technical staff and data management systems without disruptions to day-to-day citizen inquiries or online reporting tools.
- Impact on Council Tax and Public Finances: The administration contends that eliminating corporate dividend overheads and administrative friction from long-term outsourced deals will assist the borough in navigating current financial constraints. Conversely, taxpayers will be closely monitoring whether insourcing delivers genuine cost reductions or if operational overheads, direct staffing commitments, and transition expenses strain public budgets.
- Political Accountability and Performance Metrics: With the expiration of the historical Capita contract framework, political responsibility for service delivery now rests squarely with the current Labour leadership. Residents will assess performance directly against local council tax rates, response times for key services, and the overall quality of public infrastructure maintenance.
