UK Inquiry Tracker

Delivering value from government investment in major projects

Public Accounts Committee Closed Inquiry

Opened: 10 Jan 2024 Closed: 29 May 2024 Parliament page

Both the Committee and the National Audit Office (NAO) scrutinise how major projects are delivered, including inquiries on resetting of Government programmes and lessons from major projects and programmes . As part of this theme, the NAO’s report on delivering value from Government investment in major programmes looks at a … Read more

5 Recommendations

17 Conclusions

1 Report

1 Oral session

1 Letter

1 Event

Activity timeline 4 events

15 May
2024

Report published

Thirty-Second Report - Delivering value from government investment in major projects

15 Apr
2024

Correspondence

Correspondence from Nick Smallwood, CEO at the Infrastructure and Projects Authority, Cabinet Office, re Follow up to the PAC hearing on de…

20 Mar
2024

Oral evidence

Delivering value from government investment in major projects

20 Mar
2024

Formal meeting (oral evidence session) · The Thatcher Room, Portcullis House

Delivering value from government investment in major projects

Oral evidence sessions 1 session

20 Mar 2024

View on parliament.uk

Delivering value from government investment in major projects

Conrad Smewing · HM Treasury Nick Smallwood · Infrastructure and Projects Authority

Reports 1 report · click to expand

Title	HC No.	Published	Items	Response
Thirty-Second Report - Delivering value from government investme…	HC 456	15 May 2024	22	Responded

Recommendations & Conclusions

7 results

2 Recommendation Not Addressed

Thirty-Second Report - Delivering …

Develop a plan to incentivise departments to conduct high-quality, independent major project evaluations.

Government departments still have few incentives to commission and carry out high-quality evaluations of major projects. High quality evaluation is an important means of providing evidence about what works, transparency about what value a project has produced, and making the … Read more

Government Response

The government agrees with the recommendation to develop a plan for incentivising evaluations, but its response discusses supplier and market engagement with SMEs and TechUK, which is irrelevant to the committee's specific request for an evaluation plan.

HM Treasury

View details

3 Recommendation Not Addressed

Thirty-Second Report - Delivering …

Analyse and issue guidance on governance for effective cross-government major projects.

There are signs of improved cross-government working but government still struggles to establish effective governance and accountability arrangements on the most complex projects where multiple departments are involved. In our February 2024 report on cross-government working in general we concluded … Read more There are signs of improved cross-government working but government still struggles to establish effective governance and accountability arrangements on the most complex projects where multiple departments are involved. In our February 2024 report on cross-government working in general we concluded that “effective cross-government working is fundamental to delivering government’s 6 Delivering value from government investment in major projects priorities but there is a lot of work to do”. This is particularly so for complex major projects, which often contribute to the objectives of multiple government departments and involve a number of organisation in delivery. There are examples of good practice, such as the East-West Rail project’s growth board that brings together local and central government, and the No 10 Delivery Unit can also be effective in bringing departments together to deliver cross-cutting priorities. For some projects it may be more effective to have an organisation outside of the project delivery team accountable for delivering value. Development corporations such as those established to deliver regeneration benefits at Ebbsfleet for High Speed 1 and the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park for the London 2012 Games have been effective. But bringing together the right stakeholders to deliver value does not come naturally to government departments and this remains a challenge. Ensuring that appropriate individuals sit on project boards is also important to provide challenge to project teams, support delivery and ensure that value is delivered. Recommendation 3: HM Treasury and the Infrastructure Projects Authority should: a) analyse what governance structures and incentives work well to encourage cross-government working; and b) issue guidance on how government departments can apply the right approaches that reflect the objectives and complexity of their projects including for delivering value once a project is complete. Show less

Government Response

The government agrees with the recommendation to analyze governance structures for cross-government working and issue guidance. However, its response focuses on the existing Digital, Data and Technology Playbook for managing digital projects, rather than addressing the broader request for general cross-government working guidance.

HM Treasury

View details

6 Recommendation Not Addressed

Thirty-Second Report - Delivering …

Outline plans for embedding cross-government learning in future major projects.

Government departments do not routinely learn lessons from their own projects or those of other departments, so are missing opportunities to improve effectiveness and efficiency of future projects. Applying learning about what has been successful in major project delivery can … Read more

Government Response

The government agrees with the recommendation to outline plans for embedding cross-government learning. However, its response outlines reviews of commercial and digital functional standards, development of a standard taxonomy, and reviews of controls and assurance frameworks, which are not direct plans for cross-government learning.

HM Treasury

View details

1 Conclusion Not Addressed

Thirty-Second Report - Delivering …

Committee took evidence from IPA and HM Treasury based on C&AG report.

On the basis of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we took evidence from the Infrastructure and Projects Authority and HM Treasury.1

Government Response

The committee item is a factual statement about taking evidence from the IPA and HM Treasury. The government responds by agreeing to the 'recommendation' and detailing actions related to digital functions, a Technical Design Authority, and strategic supplier relationship management, which is irrelevant to the original statement.

HM Treasury

View details

7 Conclusion Not Addressed

Thirty-Second Report - Delivering …

High-quality evaluation essential for robust evidence, transparency, and delivering project value.

High quality evaluation is an important means of providing evidence about what works and transparency about what value a project has produced. In our May 2022 report on government’s use of evaluation and modelling, we stated: “Without the right incentives, … Read more

Government Response

Despite stating agreement, the government's response details its efforts to encourage international collaboration on antimicrobial products and antibiotic innovation, including commissioning an evaluability assessment from July 2025 to early 2026. This does not address the committee's conclusion on the importance of high-quality evaluation for major government projects.

HM Treasury

View details

8 Conclusion Not Addressed

Thirty-Second Report - Delivering …

Insufficient evaluations of government major projects, with significant departmental gaps remaining.

There are too few evaluations of government’s major projects. As we pointed out in our May 2022 report on the use of evaluation and modelling in government, in 2019, only 8% of £432 billion of spend on major projects had … Read more

Government Response

Despite stating agreement, the government's response focuses entirely on making public health a statutory objective for water companies, regulating sludge, and tackling antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in wastewater, with a White Paper planned for Autumn 2025. This does not address the committee's conclusion about the lack of evaluations for major government projects.

HM Treasury

View details

9 Conclusion Not Addressed

Thirty-Second Report - Delivering …

Persistent barriers, including political disengagement, continue to hinder effective departmental project evaluations.

In our May 2022 report on evaluation, we pointed out that the same barriers to departments doing more evaluations had been in place since 2013. These include a lack of political engagement and a lack of incentives for departments to … Read more

Government Response

Despite stating agreement, the government's response details actions related to monitoring healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in humans and animals, including a new data dashboard from UKHSA by Autumn 2025 and novel AMR surveillance pilots in animals until 2029. This does not address the committee's conclusion about barriers to government project evaluations.

HM Treasury

View details

Government Response AI assessment · 9 of 5 classified

Accepted 2

Not Addressed 7

Total 5 recs + 17 conclusions

Correspondence 1 letter

15 Apr 2024 Correspondence from Nick Smallwood, CEO at the Infrastructure and Projects Authority, Cabinet Office, re Follow up to the PAC hearing on delivering value from government investment in major projects (20/03/2024), dated 26 March 2024

Parliament page