This is a House of Commons Committee report, with recommendations to government. The Government has two months to respond.
Lessons learned: competition in public procurement
Date Published: 13 December 2023
This is the full report, read the report summary.
Government spent £259 billion on the procurement of goods and services in 2021–22. Of the total contract value of more than £100 billion awarded by major departments during 2021–22, around two-thirds were subject to competition in some form. Given this is a significant area of government spending, there is a genuine interest in ensuring government effectively uses competition to achieve value for money, public benefit, transparency, and probity. Illustrative scenarios included in the impact assessment for the Procurement Act suggest government could achieve savings of £4 billion to £7.7 billion per year through increased competition.
Departments and other public bodies are responsible for carrying out their own procurement exercises. The Cabinet Office, its central commercial teams within the Government Commercial Function, and its executive agency the Crown Commercial Service offer support publishing guidance, monitoring suppliers, offering advice, and running procurement frameworks for common goods and services.
The Crown Commercial Service is also responsible for providing some commercial services to the public sector, which includes running procurement frameworks. These frameworks are designed for procuring common goods and services and are intended to help departments access economies of scale and reduce administrative cost. Government departments and other public bodies are required to use open competition in their procurements, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 and related statutory instruments.
At the time we took evidence, Parliament was considering the Procurement Bill, which has now received Royal Assent to become the Procurement Act 2023 and will replace the current legislation. With the introduction of the Procurement Act, this is an opportunity to look at lessons learned from government’s transformation programme in procurement from the last 12 years.
1. Government is unable to evaluate competitive trends in markets or demonstrate that it is achieving value for money in public procurement, due to significant issues with the quality and completeness of data on contracts. Departments and other public bodies are required to publish information on prospective and awarded contracts on two databases, Contracts Finder, and Find a Tender. The Cabinet Office, including the Government Commercial Function and the Crown Commercial Service, acknowledge that the data they hold and publish is not good enough. An analysis of publicly available contract award notices on Contracts Finder, one of two contract databases, for the period 2018 to 2022 found that 6% of large contracts did not have basic information on the procurement procedure used. The Government Commercial Function agreed that it is important to maintain good data to track the trend of key performance indicators on whether contracts are delivering. But the poor quality and incompleteness of data means government is unable to evaluate competitive trends, understand how effectively markets are open to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and other companies outside government’s strategic suppliers, or set out clear directions and guidance for contracting authorities. The Cabinet Office expects the Procurement Act to help address the data issues, alongside the implementation of a single source of data.
Recommendation 1: Within three months of the coming into force of the Procurement Act, the Cabinet Office should define how it will use data to evaluate competitive trends and set out clear directions and guidance for contracting authorities on:
In order to enhance transparency, within the same timescale it should also provide a comprehensive report setting out a suite of measures designed to improve the publication of contract details, including in particular how the two contact databases (Contract Finder and Find a Tender) can be populated with complete and timely information.
2. Public authorities have often not been effective in engaging with markets and potential suppliers, and government has not provided clear guidance on how to meet requirements to treat suppliers equally while best supporting value for money. Departments and other public bodies often take an overly cautious approach to engagement and are not always clear on how to understand the markets and suppliers they buy from. Engaging with potential suppliers throughout the commercial lifecycle can help departments and other public bodies understand what the markets can provide, while providing suppliers with an opportunity to highlight potential innovations and efficiencies they can bring to the contract. Without this engagement, it is harder for departments and other public bodies to craft sufficiently clearly defined requirements that the market is able to provide. Overambitious requirements can reduce competition and distort the market by limiting the potential supplier pool. Particularly deterring smaller businesses that may think they cannot meet the requirements from engaging with public bids.
Recommendation 2: The Government Commercial Function and Cabinet Office should set out, as part of its Treasury Minute response, further details explaining the guidance and mechanisms that it has put in place to promote best practice for public authorities to appropriately conduct early engagement, without distorting the market, such as:
3. Framework agreements have become the most prevalent route for public authorities to buy common goods and services, but the Government Commercial Function has not provided sufficient guidance to address the potential risks to competitive benefits. Framework agreements involve an initial competition for suppliers to gain access to a framework, followed by a shortened call-off process for contracts to be awarded to one of those framework suppliers. Government use of frameworks for large contracts increased from 20% of contracts by value in 2018–19 to 68% in 2021–22. Inappropriate use of frameworks may lead to limiting competition either by not having enough suppliers for a mini competition or too many suppliers to effectively award a contract. The Crown Commercial Service is the largest provider of frameworks for common goods and services, across the public sector. But there are gaps in the data provided by authorities which mean that the Crown Commercial Service lacks data on the number of direct awards made without re-opening competition. The Cabinet Office agrees that it needs more structured data and more effective processes to track procurement from frameworks through the commercial lifecycle to monitor savings effectively.
Recommendation 3: The Cabinet Office should issue guidance, for example a ‘Framework Playbook’, within six months to provide central guidance for government buyers on key policies about:
4. Government has not demonstrated that it has consistently used its purchasing power to support local and national policies and objectives, or to drive healthy and competitive markets, including buying from SMEs. Government could not provide evidence that it is consistently using its purchasing power to create new businesses, new jobs, and new skills, to tackle climate change and reduce waste, and to improve supplier diversity, innovation, and resilience. The way that social value requirements are implemented can leave smaller businesses, as well as larger companies unable to meet them constraining their ability to bid on public contracts. Public authorities are not yet approaching this consistently to support SMEs to develop and build resilience to a level where they can bid on public contracts. Crown Representatives have helped government to understand its markets, but further work is needed to support SMEs.
Recommendation 4: The Cabinet Office should set out, as part of its Treasury Minute response, details explaining how it will revise its Sourcing Playbook and support government buyers towards achieving a consistent approach to balance achieving economic, social, and environmental wellbeing with unnecessarily imposing artificial constraints that create barriers to entry for SMEs.
5. We are concerned that the government may not have sufficiently considered the time, money, and resources required to provide the commercial capabilities to successfully implement the Procurement Act 2023. The Procurement Act received Royal Assent on 26 October 2023. Government has announced plans for the Act’s secondary legislation, and the new regulations are expected to be implemented fully by the end of 2024. However, the Cabinet Office and Government Commercial Function do not yet have a clear plan for the investment required, or a timeline of necessary steps to ensure that the wider public sector has the critical commercial skills required to achieve the intended far-reaching changes to the public procurement landscape. Departments and arm’s length bodies need to understand how to establish the right conditions for effective competition, varying approaches as needed across sectors and procurements. The Government Commercial Function does not have data on all relevant individuals within contracting authorities, such as arm’s length bodies or local authorities, that should be upskilled on the requirements of the Procurement Act. This could impede the process of implementation across the public procurement landscape.
Recommendation 5: The Government Commercial Function and Cabinet Office should set out, as part of its Treasury Minute response, further details explaining arrangements for:
1. On the basis of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we took evidence from the Cabinet Office, the Government Commercial Function (GCF) and the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) about the government’s purchase of goods and services through competitive procurement.1
2. Government purchases a wide variety of goods and services through competitive procurement processes, from facilities management services to specialist services such as probation, to new IT systems or large-scale infrastructure projects.2 Government suggested in the impact assessment to the Procurement Act that it could achieve savings of £4 billion to £7.7 billion per year through increased competition in public procurement.3 The Cabinet Office explained that these benefits would come partly from improvements in competition and innovation, lowering transaction costs through a simpler system, and a higher level of participation through improved transparency.4
3. Competition acts as a means of supporting probity, transparency, and confidence in public spending. Where the principles of competition are applied, the way that the process is run can affect how effective any competition is at meeting the buyer’s needs and maximising benefits in price and outcomes. The Public Contracts Regulations 2015 and related statutory instruments set out the underlying principles of equal treatment and seek to ensure that public bodies follow fair and reasonable procurement timetables and procedures. They highlight the consequences, such as artificial narrowing of competition, of failing to follow these principles, but do not actively define effective competition. The replacement Procurement Act likewise reflects principles of proportionality, transparency and ensuring that suppliers do not have an unfair advantage or disadvantage.5
4. Government spent £259 billion on procurement of goods and services in 2021–22. However, it does not measure how much of that public procurement is competitively tendered.6 GCF told us that if you look at central government savings over the last three to five years, since they have been tracking it properly, they have generally been saving 4% to 6% on £70 billion spending at central government, at the same time as getting better delivery.7
5. As well as having competitive processes in place, it is important to have the right arrangements in place to collect data on those markets and intervene as needed.8 For example, in 2021, the NAO found that in the vast and diverse social care, market, the accountability and oversight arrangements in the adult social care market in England did not work. Despite its accountability for the performance of the care system, the Department of Health & Social Care lacked visibility of the effectiveness of care commissioned and there were significant data gaps. As such, it could not assess the outcomes achieved across the system.9 The GCF told us that the data in the wider public sector is less good than it is in central government.10
6. The poor quality of much of government’s published data on contracts reduces transparency and makes it harder to identify and promote best practice. Better information would allow government to analyse how many contracts different departments award to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) or strategic suppliers. Public bodies are required to publish large amounts of information on prospective and awarded contracts. Basic information on which procurement route was used was missing for 6% of contracts recorded on Contracts Finder, one of two public contract databases, from 2018 to 2022. Information on other aspects of contracts is collected inconsistently between Contracts Finder and Find a Tender, and most departments do not consistently publish all contracts within the required time.11
7. The Cabinet Office’s central commercial teams also collect some aggregate contract information from departments’ own data systems. It uses this data for some analysis of overall trends, but does not use the more detailed contract information to conduct any analysis of competition or markets. Of 235 large contracts recorded on Find a Tender between January 2021 and January 2023, 20% of contracts using open competition received only one bid. The Cabinet Office has not assessed the expected level of single bidders within government’s major markets or analysed trends in numbers of bidders.12 The GCF acknowledged that the data in this area is not good. The GCF told us that with the Procurement Act, it plans to put in place a better transparency platform that collects bidder information at multiple stages.13
8. We asked the CCS why the existing procurement information does not seem to be used effectively to improve procurement or analyse competition in the marketplace.14 CCS told us that there is some information in the databases, but the information is not necessarily as full as it should be. The CCS commented that using the current data to compare and contrast is not necessarily the right thing to do. The CCS said that going forward, more information will be available to it.15 The GCF told us that government uses the data to track key performance indicators, in terms of whether these contracts are delivering and looks at the number of government vendors that collapse.16
9. The GCF explained that part of the problem is that because multiple contracting authorities can enter data on suppliers, the same supplier could have different identities in today’s database. The GCF expects that a single supplier information database would address this issue in the future.17 It commented that the new single database will be better than the ones inherited from the EU, which was last updated in 2015.18 We were also told by the Cabinet Office that the single database will make it easier for potential bidders to anticipate upcoming contracts.19
10. While government is moving towards improving the quality and completeness of public procurement data, there remain significant gaps in the data.20 The Cabinet Office told us that government expects the Procurement Act to help address data issues, alongside the implementation of a single supplier information database.21 The Cabinet Office highlighted that the Procurement Act creates new reporting obligations for contracting authorities that were not previously caught by the Public Contracts Regulations 2015.22
11. We wanted to know whether the move to a single database will save money. The GCF told us that government will not save much money, but suppliers will save money. The GCF highlighted that it is annoying for suppliers, particularly SMEs, to have to fill in different registration systems.23
12. Given the move to a single supplier database we were interested to hear the challenges government foresaw with the transfer of data to the new system. The GCF commented that there are 10,000 contracts and 20 fields per contract on the current databases, “so it is not an insurmountable problem”; and it is especially important to maintain that data to continue to track trends of key performance indicators.24 The GCF added that the proposed method of migrating information should help government get it right the first time.25
13. Departments have opportunities throughout the lifecycle of a contract to improve the effectiveness of competition. Making the most of the opportunities available through competition starts from departments designing realistic requirements for goods or services and using these to inform their source. While Cabinet Office guidance encourages the need for departments to engage the market sufficiently, departments often take an overly cautious approach to engagement and are not always clear on what they can do.26 Departments are also unclear how to engage with the market before they let a contract, and do not consistently follow central guidance.27
14. The GCF told us that it accepted all of the recommendations of the NAO report, and welcomed the recommendation that the Cabinet Office, GCF and CCS work with departments to understand the barriers to early market engagement and take steps to address them.28 The GCF agreed that there is a need to make sure that public authorities spend enough time understanding the market up front—what the market can deliver and what best practice is in the market—rather than coming up with what they would ideally like, which may not be deliverable. The GCF agreed that the government has often not understood what the market can deliver.29
15. We asked about checks and balances which could help ensure that departments are mindful that a mismatch between the procurement and the level of detail in the requirement can undermine the benefits of the competitive process.30 The GCF told us that the key moment of intervention is the strategic outline business case where the Cabinet Office and GCF ask the public authority whether they have an understanding of what is required.31
16. In 2020 the Department for Education’s (DfE) management of the free school meals voucher scheme during the covid-19 pandemic, was an instance where further information would have been valuable to help manage the risks of the project. DfE awarded a contract through a CCS framework on which there was a single supplier. However, it had limited evidence on the supplier’s capacity to deliver the voucher scheme to the pace and scale required.32
17. We asked what mechanisms were in place to look at a sector and identify where perhaps the market is “thin” in terms of competition and there are too few bidders or perhaps the suppliers that come through are not as good as government would like. The CCS commented that there are 350 staff with sector knowledge, in the organisation tasked with engaging with markets. The CCS told us that these staff are employed for their expertise and experience to make certain that central government understands what is going on in the markets.33
18. The CCS told us about the work they are doing to bring more suppliers in with some of its frameworks like the technology-based G-Cloud framework. The CCS commented that 99% of business done through G-Cloud is below £5 million, but it is not the only vehicle for opening the market to smaller businesses to bid on government contracts. The CCS told us that during the pandemic, it put in place a low-value procurement platform for any contract for common goods and services below £140,000. When asked how government ensures that there really is competition, the CCS noted that it is not mandatory for government buyers to engage with suppliers on CCS framework agreements. The GCF further explained that for procurement of less than £140,000, government buyers can directly award without reference to CCS frameworks.34
19. The Cabinet Office told us that particularly in defence and similar areas, departments might say, “I know who would be bidding for that”. The challenge then is to go out into the international market or look into the smaller providers to provide a realistic challenge against the incumbent or the obvious bidder. There are a mix of things that are general improvements to the thin market problem; and the Cabinet Office is focusing on sectors where it sees an excessive concentration.35
20. Framework agreements involve an initial competition for suppliers to gain access to the framework, followed by a shortened process for a department to select and appoint a supplier from the framework for a specific contract.36 Government use of frameworks for large contracts increased from 20% of contracts by value in 2018–19 to 68% in 2021–22.37 Frameworks are designed for procuring common goods and services to allow departments to realise benefits from economies of scale, but they are not always the way to achieve the best competition.38
21. The GCF commented that frameworks are growing and highlighted that there is a distinction between good and bad frameworks as well as too many frameworks. The GCF told us that on one count, procurement organisations together offer around 8,000 construction frameworks, many of which are single-supplier frameworks. The GCF further told us that a couple of years ago, it commissioned a piece of work by the King’s Fund—an independent charity focused on health and care—that helped define what a good framework looks like.39
22. The CCS agreed that there is a pronounced trend, in terms of value, to increasing use of framework agreements moving from other competitive procedures defined in the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. However, CCS did not consider that they were the “wrong” vehicle, but “just one vehicle that we use”. The CCS told us that of the c£260 billion of spend in government every year, £120 billion is what CCS calls its “marketplace” for common goods and services. The CCS agreed that it is certainly the largest, in terms of the volume of commercial agreements, with 86 frameworks. The CCS also told us it has dynamic purchasing systems, which are more flexible and open, in as much as you can bring new suppliers in at any point, whereas a framework is closed for a period of time.40 CCS told us it believes that frameworks do the right thing in terms of competition “if one uses them correctly”.41
23. The NAO report identified the need for accurate analysis of costs and benefits to both inform decisions and provide potential suppliers enough information to price bids accurately.42 The GCF told us that it is fair to say that there is a gap in data about direct awards from frameworks, which will be plugged by the transparency regulations under the new Procurement Act; that will allow government to see where those are and to close them down. The GCF told us it did not see any evidence of favouritism in contract awards.43 The GCF said that it is trying to find the “sweet spot” between having too many bidders for something, in which case all but one of them will have wasted bid costs, eventually inflating the cost to the public purse; and too few, which it said was also the wrong answer.44
24. The CCS commented that government has not extended any frameworks other than during the time of the pandemic. The CCS’s believes that bringing the framework back to market and getting competition is the right thing to do. We were told by the CCS that the price listed on the framework is the maximum price that the supplier would charge. CCS told us that it advises its customers to run a mini-competition on frameworks, so that they can then get a better price.45
25. We asked the GCF whether there was a requirement for departments to publish all contracts awarded off a framework. The GCF described that there are such requirements but that full contract publishing currently only applies to central government. The GCF commented that contracts from NHS trusts, for instance, do not today fall under contract publishing requirements, but will in the future.46
26. We asked how government would ensure that it was not creating barriers preventing SMEs from getting on frameworks. The GCF commented that SME spend has increased from £11 billion in 2016–17 to £21 billion last year. CCS and the GCF explained to us how they try to make certain that SMEs are a market for the government, because they recognise the innovation that an SME could bring. They told us that, of the 11,000 CCS suppliers, 4,500 are new suppliers to government over the last five years and 8,300 are SMEs. GCF told us that it is hopeful that the Procurement Act will widen the use of dynamic purchasing agreements, so that they can have open frameworks that can be opened on periodic dates to let more suppliers in. GCF told us that, even if it is a four or five-year framework, it could let suppliers in annually or six-monthly, depending on how the framework is set up.47
27. The NAO report highlighted the value of departments considering how a contract will contribute to meeting key social priorities such a fighting climate change, creating jobs and promoting innovation.48 We questioned how much consideration has been given to using government’s immense purchasing power to encourage business to behave in a way that meets government’s other objectives. The GCF described three things that it had felt appropriate to mandate: first, that government will not deal with businesses that do not pay their suppliers promptly; second, that the GCF had introduced a requirement for suppliers for contracts over £5 million to have a net zero policy in place and a target for that; and third, that there is a modern slavery exclusion.49
28. The GCF told us that the “next level down” of issues are things that could be covered in the social value elements of the contract. The GCF commented that at least 10% of the evaluation criteria for contracts should be allocated to a social value dimension. The GCF had provided a menu of social value criteria for procurement staff, with recommended metrics that should be used to assess contracts.50
29. We have previously commented, in our report on transforming rehabilitation, that the MOJ had frozen voluntary sector organisations out of the bidding because they were unable to provide the onerous Parent Company Guarantees required to tender for the contracts.51 We wanted to know what support is available for smaller businesses that are committed to delivering social value, but the size of the contract makes it difficult for them. The GCF commented that the social value criteria is applied at a contract level.52
30. However, for contracts that are too small to be able to fund a certain number of apprentices, it is difficult to sensibly embed social value. We wanted to hear how government is planning to review this or engage with small businesses to address this. The GCF commented that one of the purposes of the SME Crown representative is to try to tease that out. The GCF told us that if something is so small as not to be easily measurable, that will also apply to the large company that is bidding. The GCF explained that if the larger company says, “I will put a whole apprentice on that”, but the smaller company can only put half an apprentice on it, maybe we do have the right result. The GCF reflected that in that example, it would be the wrong metric to apply to that contract.53
31. On how it might know whether efforts to transform public procurement have been successful, the GCF told us that government could look at the number of challenges they get and the number of disputes. The GCF noted that alternatively government could also look at the KPI performance or social value criteria and whether they are seeing that those are being usefully applied to generate more than just price and quality for the contract itself. GCF reflected that a national procurement policy statement is permitted by the new Procurement Act, which will allow the government of the day to say: “of all the social value criteria that we have on our published menu, we would like procurements to focus on the environment”, for example, or training, or local employment, as determined by the government of the day. The GCF will be able to look at those and see how many of those criteria have cropped up in local procurements.54
32. The new Procurement Act 2023 will be in due course be accompanied by the replacement of the current Public Contracts Regulations 2015 and related statutory instruments made under the previous primary legislation. The Act reflects principles of proportionality, transparency and ensuring that suppliers do not have an unfair advantage or disadvantage.55 The Procurement Act has been developed with the aim of reducing administrative costs to businesses and the public sector, while permitting flexibility in how buyers structure competitions and use negotiation. This increases the importance of collecting good quality data to ensure that departments are using this flexibility properly and identifying best practices.56 We asked how government would prepare all departments and public bodies to deal with these changes. The Cabinet Office highlighted that it has already held briefings with the Civil Service Board in July, putting heads of departments on notice to make sure they were looking forward to and ready for it.57
33. The GCF told us that there is a constant drumbeat, in its commercial function calls, on the training programme, so that all public bodies, such as local authorities and health authorities know about the training. The GCF commented that there were some videos ready to be rolled out. However, the GCF noted that it does not know the names of all the people they may need to contact. The GCF told us they will be trying to ensure that other stakeholders within contracting authorities, make certain that the right people are trained at the right level. The GCF noted that there are around 50,000 people now signed up for the Government Commercial College, of which they think 20,000 are employed in the procurement function in a public authority.58
34. We have many departments coming before us with varying degrees of success appointing commercial suppliers via public procurement processes and delivering effective outcomes. We have previously recommended, in our report on Green Homes Grant voucher scheme, how the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy should improve the technical scrutiny of bids during its procurements, to better assure the capability of suppliers and the practical feasibility of their proposals, particularly where a bidder is promising considerably more than others.59
35. We asked how government is going to improve performance of all departments. The GCF told us that it is considering how to monitor capability through standards, and then benchmarking and workshops. The GCF said that central government has a very active learning and development programme, which is where it gets the best people from the public sector to come and talk to colleagues about the things that they are doing well. The GCF commented that it has around 35,000 people signed up for its learning modules. The GCF told us it used to run four or five workshops a year before covid-19 with 50 people attending. The GCF said it has now learned how to work online and get about 500 people attending every week for workshops that are driving up adherence to standards.60
36. The GCF told us that there are professional standards that assess whether the learning curriculum is working. The GCF commented it was one of the first government functions to introduce professional standards. The GCF explained that it assesses commercial staff via a day-long assessment centre which is improving standards of training across grades.61 7,000 people have been put through that assessment centre. It told us that, of the 1,500 or so senior staff in the Government Commercial Organisation (GCO), who are employed centrally and then deployed to departments, 86% are fully accredited.62
37. The GCF told us that the priority for implementing the new Act is training and said that it had a training programme ready to roll out from December. The GCF commented that it expects that the Act will be implemented in October 2024. We were told by the GCF that there is secondary legislation that should be passed by March 2024, which allows government six months to implement training. GCF said that its training programme would cover 20,000 procurement staff, and probably 50,000 people in policy areas and other parts of the public sector. GCF told us that government has already trained nearly 30,000 people in contract management. The GCF further explained that it had a four-part training programme, varying from online “knowledge drops”, e-learning, through to facilitated training. The GCF acknowledged that government needs to continue to develop commercial expertise across government.63
Dame Meg Hillier, in the Chair
Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown
Mr Jonathan Djanogly
Mr Mark Francois
Peter Grant
Sarah Olney
Draft Report (Competition in public procurement), proposed by the Chair, brought up and read.
Ordered, That the draft Report be read a second time, paragraph by paragraph.
Paragraphs 1 to 37 read and agreed to.
Summary agreed to.
Introduction agreed to.
Conclusions and recommendations agreed to.
Resolved, That the Report be the Sixth Report of the Committee to the House.
Ordered, That the Chair make the Report to the House.
Ordered, That embargoed copies of the Report be made available (Standing Order No. 134).
Adjourned till Monday 11 December at 3.00 p.m.
The following witnesses gave evidence. Transcripts can be viewed on the inquiry publications page of the Committee’s website.
Sir Alex Chisholm, Permanent Secretary, Cabinet Office; Gareth Rhys Williams, Government Chief Commercial Officer and Non-Executive Director, Crown Commercial Service; Simon Tse, Chief Executive, Crown Commercial ServiceQ1–92
The following written evidence was received and can be viewed on the inquiry publications page of the Committee’s website.
CPP numbers are generated by the evidence processing system and so may not be complete.
1 Jones, Duncan (CPP0002)
2 Planet Labs (CPP0004)
3 Smith, Mr Chris (CPP0001)
4 What Works Centre for Local Economic Growth (CPP0005)
All publications from the Committee are available on the publications page of the Committee’s website.
|
Number |
Title |
Reference |
|
1st |
The New Hospital Programme |
HC 77 |
|
2nd |
The condition of school buildings |
HC 78 |
|
3rd |
Revising health assessments for disability benefits |
HC 79 |
|
4th |
The Department for Work & Pensions Annual Report and Accounts 2022–23 |
HC 290 |
|
5th |
Government’s programme of waste reforms |
HC 333 |
|
Number |
Title |
Reference |
|
1st |
Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy Annual Report and Accounts 2020–21 |
HC 59 |
|
2nd |
Lessons from implementing IR35 reforms |
HC 60 |
|
3rd |
The future of the Advanced Gas-cooled Reactors |
HC 118 |
|
4th |
Use of evaluation and modelling in government |
HC 254 |
|
5th |
Local economic growth |
HC 252 |
|
6th |
Department of Health and Social Care 2020–21 Annual Report and Accounts |
HC 253 |
|
7th |
Armoured Vehicles: the Ajax programme |
HC 259 |
|
8th |
Financial sustainability of the higher education sector in England |
HC 257 |
|
9th |
Child Maintenance |
HC 255 |
|
10th |
Restoration and Renewal of Parliament |
HC 49 |
|
11th |
The rollout of the COVID-19 vaccine programme in England |
HC 258 |
|
12th |
Management of PPE contracts |
HC 260 |
|
13th |
Secure training centres and secure schools |
HC 30 |
|
14th |
Investigation into the British Steel Pension Scheme |
HC 251 |
|
15th |
The Police Uplift Programme |
HC 261 |
|
16th |
Managing cross-border travel during the COVID-19 pandemic |
HC 29 |
|
17th |
Government’s contracts with Randox Laboratories Ltd |
HC 28 |
|
18th |
Government actions to combat waste crime |
HC 33 |
|
19th |
Regulating after EU Exit |
HC 32 |
|
20th |
Whole of Government Accounts 2019–20 |
HC 31 |
|
21st |
Transforming electronic monitoring services |
HC 34 |
|
22nd |
Tackling local air quality breaches |
HC 37 |
|
23rd |
Measuring and reporting public sector greenhouse gas emissions |
HC 39 |
|
24th |
Redevelopment of Defra’s animal health infrastructure |
HC 42 |
|
25th |
Regulation of energy suppliers |
HC 41 |
|
26th |
The Department for Work and Pensions’ Accounts 2021–22 – Fraud and error in the benefits system |
HC 44 |
|
27th |
Evaluating innovation projects in children’s social care |
HC 38 |
|
28th |
Improving the Accounting Officer Assessment process |
HC 43 |
|
29th |
The Affordable Homes Programme since 2015 |
HC 684 |
|
30th |
Developing workforce skills for a strong economy |
HC 685 |
|
31st |
Managing central government property |
HC 48 |
|
32nd |
Grassroots participation in sport and physical activity |
HC 46 |
|
33rd |
HMRC performance in 2021–22 |
HC 686 |
|
34th |
The Creation of the UK Infrastructure Bank |
HC 45 |
|
35th |
Introducing Integrated Care Systems |
HC 47 |
|
36th |
The Defence digital strategy |
HC 727 |
|
37th |
Support for vulnerable adolescents |
HC 730 |
|
38th |
Managing NHS backlogs and waiting times in England |
HC 729 |
|
39th |
Excess Votes 2021–22 |
HC 1132 |
|
40th |
COVID employment support schemes |
HC 810 |
|
41st |
Driving licence backlogs at the DVLA |
HC 735 |
|
42nd |
The Restart Scheme for long-term unemployed people |
HC 733 |
|
43rd |
Progress combatting fraud |
HC 40 |
|
44th |
The Digital Services Tax |
HC 732 |
|
45th |
Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy Annual Report and Accounts 2021–22 |
HC 1254 |
|
46th |
BBC Digital |
HC 736 |
|
47th |
Investigation into the UK Passport Office |
HC 738 |
|
48th |
MoD Equipment Plan 2022–2032 |
HC 731 |
|
49th |
Managing tax compliance following the pandemic |
HC 739 |
|
50th |
Government Shared Services |
HC 734 |
|
51st |
Tackling Defra’s ageing digital services |
HC 737 |
|
52nd |
Restoration & Renewal of the Palace of Westminster – 2023 Recall |
HC 1021 |
|
53rd |
The performance of UK Security Vetting |
HC 994 |
|
54th |
Alcohol treatment services |
HC 1001 |
|
55th |
Education recovery in schools in England |
HC 998 |
|
56th |
Supporting investment into the UK |
HC 996 |
|
57th |
AEA Technology Pension Case |
HC 1005 |
|
58th |
Energy bills support |
HC 1074 |
|
59th |
Decarbonising the power sector |
HC 1003 |
|
60th |
Timeliness of local auditor reporting |
HC 995 |
|
61st |
Progress on the courts and tribunals reform programme |
HC 1002 |
|
62nd |
Department of Health and Social Care 2021–22 Annual Report and Accounts |
HC 997 |
|
63rd |
HS2 Euston |
HC 1004 |
|
64th |
The Emergency Services Network |
HC 1006 |
|
65th |
Progress in improving NHS mental health services |
HC 1000 |
|
66th |
PPE Medpro: awarding of contracts during the pandemic |
HC 1590 |
|
67th |
Child Trust Funds |
HC 1231 |
|
68th |
Local authority administered COVID support schemes in England |
HC 1234 |
|
69th |
Tackling fraud and corruption against government |
HC 1230 |
|
70th |
Digital transformation in government: addressing the barriers to efficiency |
HC 1229 |
|
71st |
Resetting government programmes |
HC 1231 |
|
72nd |
Update on the rollout of smart meters |
HC 1332 |
|
73rd |
Access to urgent and emergency care |
HC 1336 |
|
74th |
Bulb Energy |
HC 1232 |
|
75th |
Active travel in England |
HC 1335 |
|
76th |
The Asylum Transformation Programme |
HC 1334 |
|
77th |
Supported housing |
HC 1330 |
|
78th |
Resettlement support for prison leavers |
HC 1329 |
|
79th |
Support for innovation to deliver net zero |
HC 1331 |
|
80th |
Progress with Making Tax Digital |
HC 1333 |
|
1st Special Report |
Sixth Annual Report of the Chair of the Committee of Public Accounts |
HC 50 |
|
2nd Special Report |
Seventh Annual Report of the Chair of the Committee of Public Accounts |
HC 1055 |
|
Number |
Title |
Reference |
|
1st |
Low emission cars |
HC 186 |
|
2nd |
BBC strategic financial management |
HC 187 |
|
3rd |
COVID-19: Support for children’s education |
HC 240 |
|
4th |
COVID-19: Local government finance |
HC 239 |
|
5th |
COVID-19: Government Support for Charities |
HC 250 |
|
6th |
Public Sector Pensions |
HC 289 |
|
7th |
Adult Social Care Markets |
HC 252 |
|
8th |
COVID 19: Culture Recovery Fund |
HC 340 |
|
9th |
Fraud and Error |
HC 253 |
|
10th |
Overview of the English rail system |
HC 170 |
|
11th |
Local auditor reporting on local government in England |
HC 171 |
|
12th |
COVID 19: Cost Tracker Update |
HC 173 |
|
13th |
Initial lessons from the government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic |
HC 175 |
|
14th |
Windrush Compensation Scheme |
HC 174 |
|
15th |
DWP Employment support |
HC 177 |
|
16th |
Principles of effective regulation |
HC 176 |
|
17th |
High Speed 2: Progress at Summer 2021 |
HC 329 |
|
18th |
Government’s delivery through arm’s-length bodies |
HC 181 |
|
19th |
Protecting consumers from unsafe products |
HC 180 |
|
20th |
Optimising the defence estate |
HC 179 |
|
21st |
School Funding |
HC 183 |
|
22nd |
Improving the performance of major defence equipment contracts |
HC 185 |
|
23rd |
Test and Trace update |
HC 182 |
|
24th |
Crossrail: A progress update |
HC 184 |
|
25th |
The Department for Work and Pensions’ Accounts 2020–21 – Fraud and error in the benefits system |
HC 633 |
|
26th |
Lessons from Greensill Capital: accreditation to business support schemes |
HC 169 |
|
27th |
Green Homes Grant Voucher Scheme |
HC 635 |
|
28th |
Efficiency in government |
HC 636 |
|
29th |
The National Law Enforcement Data Programme |
HC 638 |
|
30th |
Challenges in implementing digital change |
HC 637 |
|
31st |
Environmental Land Management Scheme |
HC 639 |
|
32nd |
Delivering gigabitcapable broadband |
HC 743 |
|
33rd |
Underpayments of the State Pension |
HC 654 |
|
34th |
Local Government Finance System: Overview and Challenges |
HC 646 |
|
35th |
The pharmacy early payment and salary advance schemes in the NHS |
HC 745 |
|
36th |
EU Exit: UK Border post transition |
HC 746 |
|
37th |
HMRC Performance in 2020–21 |
HC 641 |
|
38th |
COVID-19 cost tracker update |
HC 640 |
|
39th |
DWP Employment Support: Kickstart Scheme |
HC 655 |
|
40th |
Excess votes 2020–21: Serious Fraud Office |
HC 1099 |
|
41st |
Achieving Net Zero: Follow up |
HC 642 |
|
42nd |
Financial sustainability of schools in England |
HC 650 |
|
43rd |
Reducing the backlog in criminal courts |
HC 643 |
|
44th |
NHS backlogs and waiting times in England |
HC 747 |
|
45th |
Progress with trade negotiations |
HC 993 |
|
46th |
Government preparedness for the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons for government on risk |
HC 952 |
|
47th |
Academies Sector Annual Report and Accounts 2019/20 |
HC 994 |
|
48th |
HMRC’s management of tax debt |
HC 953 |
|
49th |
Regulation of private renting |
HC 996 |
|
50th |
Bounce Back Loans Scheme: Follow-up |
HC 951 |
|
51st |
Improving outcomes for women in the criminal justice system |
HC 997 |
|
52nd |
Ministry of Defence Equipment Plan 2021–31 |
HC 1164 |
|
1st Special Report |
Fifth Annual Report of the Chair of the Committee of Public Accounts |
HC 222 |
|
Number |
Title |
Reference |
|
1st |
Support for children with special educational needs and disabilities |
HC 85 |
|
2nd |
Defence Nuclear Infrastructure |
HC 86 |
|
3rd |
High Speed 2: Spring 2020 Update |
HC 84 |
|
4th |
EU Exit: Get ready for Brexit Campaign |
HC 131 |
|
5th |
University technical colleges |
HC 87 |
|
6th |
Excess votes 2018–19 |
HC 243 |
|
7th |
Gambling regulation: problem gambling and protecting vulnerable people |
HC 134 |
|
8th |
NHS capital expenditure and financial management |
HC 344 |
|
9th |
Water supply and demand management |
HC 378 |
|
10th |
Defence capability and the Equipment Plan |
HC 247 |
|
11th |
Local authority investment in commercial property |
HC 312 |
|
12th |
Management of tax reliefs |
HC 379 |
|
13th |
Whole of Government Response to COVID-19 |
HC 404 |
|
14th |
Readying the NHS and social care for the COVID-19 peak |
HC 405 |
|
15th |
Improving the prison estate |
HC 244 |
|
16th |
Progress in remediating dangerous cladding |
HC 406 |
|
17th |
Immigration enforcement |
HC 407 |
|
18th |
NHS nursing workforce |
HC 408 |
|
19th |
Restoration and renewal of the Palace of Westminster |
HC 549 |
|
20th |
Tackling the tax gap |
HC 650 |
|
21st |
Government support for UK exporters |
HC 679 |
|
22nd |
Digital transformation in the NHS |
HC 680 |
|
23rd |
Delivering carrier strike |
HC 684 |
|
24th |
Selecting towns for the Towns Fund |
HC 651 |
|
25th |
Asylum accommodation and support transformation programme |
HC 683 |
|
26th |
Department of Work and Pensions Accounts 2019–20 |
HC 681 |
|
27th |
Covid-19: Supply of ventilators |
HC 685 |
|
28th |
The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority’s management of the Magnox contract |
HC 653 |
|
29th |
Whitehall preparations for EU Exit |
HC 682 |
|
30th |
The production and distribution of cash |
HC 654 |
|
31st |
Starter Homes |
HC 88 |
|
32nd |
Specialist Skills in the civil service |
HC 686 |
|
33rd |
Covid-19: Bounce Back Loan Scheme |
HC 687 |
|
34th |
Covid-19: Support for jobs |
HC 920 |
|
35th |
Improving Broadband |
HC 688 |
|
36th |
HMRC performance 2019–20 |
HC 690 |
|
37th |
Whole of Government Accounts 2018–19 |
HC 655 |
|
38th |
Managing colleges’ financial sustainability |
HC 692 |
|
39th |
Lessons from major projects and programmes |
HC 694 |
|
40th |
Achieving government’s long-term environmental goals |
HC 927 |
|
41st |
COVID 19: the free school meals voucher scheme |
HC 689 |
|
42nd |
COVID-19: Government procurement and supply of Personal Protective Equipment |
HC 928 |
|
43rd |
COVID-19: Planning for a vaccine Part 1 |
HC 930 |
|
44th |
Excess Votes 2019–20 |
HC 1205 |
|
45th |
Managing flood risk |
HC 931 |
|
46th |
Achieving Net Zero |
HC 935 |
|
47th |
COVID-19: Test, track and trace (part 1) |
HC 932 |
|
48th |
Digital Services at the Border |
HC 936 |
|
49th |
COVID-19: housing people sleeping rough |
HC 934 |
|
50th |
Defence Equipment Plan 2020–2030 |
HC 693 |
|
51st |
Managing the expiry of PFI contracts |
HC 1114 |
|
52nd |
Key challenges facing the Ministry of Justice |
HC 1190 |
|
53rd |
Covid 19: supporting the vulnerable during lockdown |
HC 938 |
|
54th |
Improving single living accommodation for service personnel |
HC 940 |
|
55th |
Environmental tax measures |
HC 937 |
|
56th |
Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund |
HC 941 |
1 C&AG’s Report, Lessons learned: competition in public procurement, Session 2022–23, HC 1664, 19 July 2023
2 C&AG’s Report, para 1.3
3 C&AG’s Report, para 4
4 Q 2
5 C&AG’s Report, para 2
6 C&AG’s Report, para 4
7 Q 2
8 C&AG’s Report, para 3.25
9 C&AG’s Report, para 3.26
10 Q 2
11 C&AG’s Report, para 15
12 C&AG’s Report, para 16
13 Q 21
14 C&AG’s Report, para 2.16
15 Q 41
16 Q 18
17 Q 50
18 Q 43
19 Q 61
20 C&AG’s Report, para 15
21 Q 61
22 Q 62
23 Q 56
24 Q 50
25 Q 43
26 C&AG’s Report, para 11
27 C&AG’s Report, para 18
28 Q 13, C&AG’s Report, para 20
29 Q 13
30 C&AG’s Report, para 3.8
31 Q 14
32 C&AG’s Report, para 3.17
33 Q 22
34 Q 19
35 Q 23
36 C&AG’s Report, para 2.9
37 C&AG’s Report, para 2.8, Figure 5
38 C&AG’s Report, para 13
39 Q 11
40 Q 9
41 Q 10
42 C&AG’s Report, para 3.9
43 Q 23
44 Q 42
45 Qq 34–35
46 Qq 65–66
47 Q 11
48 C&AG’s Report para 1.5
49 Q 71
50 Q 71
51 Committee of Public Accounts, Transforming rehabilitation: progress review, Ninety-Fourth Report of Session 2017–19, HC 1747, 3 May 2019, recommendation 4
52 Qq 74–75
53 Q 75
54 Q 70
55 C&AG’s Report, para 2
56 C&AG’s Report, para 17
57 Q 79
58 Q 81
59 Committee of Public Accounts, Green Homes Grant Voucher Scheme, Twenty-Seventh Report of Session 2021–22, HC 635, 1 December 2021, recommendation 5
60 Q 3
61 Qq 3–4
62 Q 5
63 Q 43