11
Accepted
In discussing the historic performance on managing major programmes and the challenges they have faced,...
Conclusion
In discussing the historic performance on managing major programmes and the challenges they have faced, the IPA stated that the UK government has some of the most novel and complex programmes in the world, that are probably more complex than many encountered in the private sector. Programmes in both sectors face challenges—the IPA stated that a number of studies have suggested that around 75% of major programmes in the private and public sectors, overspend or are delivered late.18 Nonetheless, the IPA stated that there were practices in the private sector that the public sector could learn from. This included there being more front-end development of programmes at the beginning, focusing on getting the business case and cost estimates to a level of accuracy that stakeholders can approve with more confidence. The IPA stated that government tends to keep options open for too long and should be more decisive about the outcome and intent that a programme is delivering and make choices on scope as early as practically possible.19
Government Response Summary
The government agrees with the committee's observations and outlines existing measures like integrating deliverability checklists into spending proposals, the outcome-focused approach of Spending Review 2020, and the establishment of Project Speed and its reforms to improve delivery and achieve value for money.
Government Response
Accepted
Government Response
Accepted
HM Government
Accepted
1.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendations. Target implementation date: August 2021 1.2 HM Treasury has taken significant steps to ensure that the public and private sectors have the capacity to deliver on its investment commitments and this was a priority ahead of the 2020 Spending Review. To support this, government departments worked with functional experts on key programmes and deliverability and feasibility were integrated into the planning and spending process, for example by requiring departments to use the Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA) deliverability checklist in their spending proposals. Further scrutiny was applied by a technical appraisal panel on the analysis of specific capital proposals where required. 1.3 Spending Review 2020 also embedded a new focus on real-world outcomes and tied spending and performance more closely together, to ensure that spending delivers value for money. Provisional priority outcomes were published for each UK government department, capturing the government’s long-term policy objectives, from reducing crime to improving education standards across the country. This outcomes- focused approach is part of implementing the Public Value Framework and will place real-world outcomes front and centre in departmental planning and delivery. 1.4 HM Treasury has also established Project Speed, in collaboration with 10 Downing Street and the IPA, to deliver infrastructure projects better, greener and faster. Around 85 Project Speed reforms were announced in the National Infrastructure Strategy in November 2020. The department is now focused on implementing these reforms alongside developing new options to ensure the government is able to deliver on its investment commitments in a timely manner. 1.5 HM Treasury will write to the Committee within six months setting out further information on these measures.
Source
Committee
Public Accounts Committee
Report
Thirty-Ninth Report - Lessons from major projects and programmes
29 Jan 2021
HC 694
Addressee Bodies
HM Treasury
Timeline
Recommendation age
5.5 yrs
Report published
29 Jan 2021