A British MP has accused Microsoft of overcharging the National Health Service in a heated debate over government tech contracts. Samantha Niblett, a Labour politician, claimed the tech giant locked in the NHS with cheap initial offers before hiking prices, sparking calls for more deals with UK firms.
The Shocking Claim in Parliament
Samantha Niblett made her bold statement during a House of Commons committee session on November 19, 2025. She told the digital government minister that Microsoft had ripped off the NHS, pointing to massive contracts that trap public services in costly long term agreements.
Niblett, who represents South Derbyshire and has a background in data and tech, did not share specific proof right away. But she stood firm when questioned, saying the issue shows how big tech firms hook clients with low entry costs and then raise fees sharply.
This comes at a time when the UK government faces pressure to cut spending and support local businesses. The allegation quickly spread online, with people debating the fairness of foreign tech dominance in public sectors.
The session highlighted growing worries about vendor lock in, where switching providers becomes too expensive or complex. Niblett urged leaders to rethink these deals to avoid overpaying in the future.
Details of the Massive Microsoft Deals
The NHS signed a five year contract with Microsoft worth over 700 million pounds for tools like Office 365 and Teams. This deal covers about 1.5 million staff and aims to boost productivity across hospitals and clinics.
On a broader scale, the UK government spent 1.9 billion pounds on Microsoft licenses in the 2024 2025 financial year alone. That’s part of a larger five year agreement that could total up to 9 billion pounds if trends continue.
These figures come amid a 40 billion pound budget shortfall for the government. Critics argue that such heavy reliance on one company limits options and drives up costs over time.
Niblett described it as getting enticed with cheap deals before being stuck with exponential charges. This pattern has been seen in other public sector contracts, where initial savings turn into long term expenses.
Past Troubles with NHS Tech Contracts
The NHS has a history of problematic IT deals that cost taxpayers dearly. Back in 2010, the government scrapped an 80 million pound Microsoft licensing agreement due to lack of budget and business case.
More recently, in 2023, NHS England extended a national deal for Microsoft products, including an 8 million pound one month bridge to keep services running. These moves show ongoing dependence despite past issues.
A major cyber attack in 2017 hit NHS systems hard, partly because support for old Windows software had ended. The government had paid Microsoft for extended security but let it lapse, leading to widespread disruptions.
-
-
- Key past events include the 2013 abandonment of a 12 billion pound NHS IT program that never launched.
- Another was the 2021 lawsuit over a 23 million pound data deal with Palantir, raising privacy concerns.
- Recent deals like a 35 billion pound contract for NHS systems with other firms highlight ongoing outsourcing debates.
-
These examples fuel the current criticism, as they reveal patterns of high costs and risks in tech procurement.
Reactions from Experts and the Public
Tech experts say Niblett’s claims point to a real problem in public procurement. Many agree that lock in effects make it hard for governments to switch to cheaper or local options.
Public sentiment on social media shows frustration with foreign tech giants taking a big slice of UK budgets. Posts call for boosting British firms to keep money in the economy and create jobs.
Microsoft has been approached for comment but has not responded yet. In past similar cases, the company defended its pricing as competitive and value driven.
Government officials, including the digital minister, noted the need for reliable tools but promised to explore more diverse suppliers. This could lead to policy changes favoring UK based tech companies.
The debate ties into broader trends, like calls for AI sovereignty where nations build their own tech to avoid dependence.
What This Means for the Future
This controversy could push the government to review all major tech contracts. With the NHS under strain from budget cuts and rising demands, saving on IT could free up funds for patient care.
Experts predict more scrutiny on deals with US firms, potentially opening doors for British startups in cloud and software services.
| Aspect | Current Situation | Potential Change |
|---|---|---|
| NHS Microsoft Deal | 700 million pounds over 5 years for productivity tools | Shift to UK alternatives for cost savings |
| Government Spending | 1.9 billion pounds yearly on licenses | Diversify to local firms to reduce lock in |
| Historical Costs | Billions lost in failed IT projects | Stricter procurement rules to avoid repeats |
| Public Impact | Higher taxes funding foreign tech | More jobs and innovation in UK sector |
These shifts might encourage competition and innovation, benefiting taxpayers in the long run.
Lawmakers like Niblett want action to prevent overcharging and promote fair deals. As debates continue, this could reshape how the UK handles tech procurement.
Broader Implications for Tech and Government
Beyond the NHS, this row highlights global issues with big tech dominance. Countries worldwide grapple with similar dependencies, from data privacy to economic control.
In the UK, it connects to recent events like the 2024 push for digital transformation amid economic recovery. With inflation and budget woes, efficient spending is key.
Analysts suggest investing in open source alternatives or homegrown solutions to break the cycle. This approach has worked in places like Switzerland, where AI sovereignty efforts reduce foreign reliance.
The discussion also touches on ethical concerns, such as data security in health services. Ensuring patient information stays safe while cutting costs remains a top priority.
If you’re following this story, share your thoughts in the comments below or spread the word on social media to keep the conversation going.
