1. Realising best value for money
How can Public Accounts Committees draw attention to
government waste?
Keith Davis, Director of Cross Government Studies
3rd Westminster workshop, June 2013

2. Public Accounts Committees can improve value for money in different ways
Sector reports can
give evidence on specific cases
identify general issues
Overall (cross-cutting) reports can
set expectations
bring out common problems
follow up on action taken
make a difference across government
challenge what has been delivered
A series of reports can
track progress
Apply a consistent framework

3. Sector reports give evidence on specific cases
2011 report on DWP
cost reduction
- DWP lacks clear strategy
2011 report on DfID financial management – DfID lacks data
to measure value for money

4. Sector reports allow the Committee to identify issues across departments
2011 report on NHS procurement indicates a wider issue

5. Overall PAC report can set expectations
From 2007 efficiency progress report
From 2010 VFM savings report

6. Overall report can bring out common problems
Common problems identified by Westminster PAC:
Data quality
Sustainability of savings
Centre not in control
Risk of costs being reallocated not saved

7. Overall report can bring out common problems
data accuracy issue
2010 Report: centre needs to get a grip

8. Overall reports can follow up on action taken

9. Reports can make a difference across government
2010 Report on consultancy - government response

10. Reports can challenge what has been delivered

11. A series of reports can track progress on subjects of perennial concern
Consultancy (reports in 2002, 2007, 2010)
Property (report in 2008, followed up in 2012)
Reorganisations (report in 2012 following up NAO report in 2010)
Procurement (reports in 2004 and 2007, NAO follow-up in 2006, 2010, 2012, 2013)

12. A series of reports can track progress
2007 Report: Progress towards 2008 target
2012 Report: Change in overall spending in
2010 Report: Progress towards 2011 savings targets

13. A series of reports can apply a consistent framework
A journey – structured cost reduction will encompass some/all of these elements. The point is that just focusing on the quick wins or optimising the current delivery model through tactical activity will not be enough to deliver the scale of cost reduction required. The graph illustrates the likelihood of cost reduction activity being sustainable – the columns within are not meant to be mutually exclusive but a progression through to a whole scale transformational change programme and ongoing innovation and continuous improvement.
Explain tactical efficiency savings section:
Quick wins
Cutting obvious waste
Often identified by frontline
Prioritisation
Based on assessment of costs/benefits/risks
Cutting low value activity/programmes
Programme slimming
Process improvement
Using frontline generated ideas
Driving waste out of processes
Localised process improvement activity (rather than full Lean business transformation)
Performance improvement
Using performance information
Internal benchmarking
collaboration and standardisation