Select Committee · Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee

The Government’s management of its major projects

Status: Closed Opened: 3 Feb 2020 Closed: 29 Jul 2020 23 recommendations 10 conclusions 1 report

The Government’s Major Projects Portfolio (MPP) has 133 projects with a value of £423 billion, and these are only a fraction of the projects delivered by Government. Major projects are the main mechanism by which the government invests in infrastructure, transforms services, and improves IT. The MPP includes high-profile projects such as Crossrail, Gov UK … Show more

Clear

Reports

1 report
Title HC No. Published Items Response
Third Report - Delivering the Government’s infrastructure c… HC 125 28 Jul 2020 33 Responded

Recommendations & Conclusions

9 items
5 Conclusion Third Report - Delivering the Governmen… Acknowledged

Previous infrastructure strategies have not led to coherent and co-ordinated infrastructure spending.

Previous infrastructure strategies have not led to coherent and co-ordinated infrastructure spending. A scattergun approach to infrastructure investment might result in expensive infrastructure that does not benefit a local area either because it is not supported by complementary services (for example new houses without transport links); or it is not … Read more

Government response AI summary
The government acknowledges the committee's observations, highlighting the existing institutional framework for infrastructure and the central role of the National Infrastructure Commission, stating it will build on this further upon publishing the National Infrastructure Strategy (NIS).
Read full response →
13 Conclusion Third Report - Delivering the Governmen… Acknowledged

It is clear from the evidence received that locally-led infrastructure investment can- in some instances—respond...

It is clear from the evidence received that locally-led infrastructure investment can- in some instances—respond better to local needs and contexts. But there are concerns about local capability and short-term funding mechanisms.

Government response AI summary
The government acknowledged the value of locally-led infrastructure investment and recognized concerns about local capability and capacity. It stated a commitment to ensuring and building project delivery capability across regions to effectively utilise and deliver future funding.
Read full response →
15 Recommendation Third Report - Delivering the Governmen… Acknowledged

A project’s benefits are the very reason it is proposed and delivered, and the Committee...

A project’s benefits are the very reason it is proposed and delivered, and the Committee does not believe that a project can be deemed successful if it does not demonstrate realisation of its stated benefits. The Government has sought to justify spending millions of pounds on infrastructure during economically-uncertain times … Read more

Government response AI summary
The government explains that its existing Green Book methodology and IPA gateway reviews already focus on benefit realisation, with departments responsible for publishing data. The IPA is currently exploring how to publish benefits in future Annual Reports, acknowledging the need for demonstration.
Read full response →
17 Recommendation Third Report - Delivering the Governmen… Acknowledged

Benefits must be prioritised and reported.

Benefits must be prioritised and reported. The IPA should report against benefits plans consistently in its annual reports from 2021–22. Consistent reporting of benefits should include a standardised financial measure, reported as trend data (showing the benefit agreed at the outset, alongside any agreed changes at specific dates, up to … Read more

Government response AI summary
The government agrees that benefits should be reported and encourages departments to publish their data. However, the IPA is only 'taking steps to explore' how benefits can be published in future Annual Reports, without committing to the specific timeline, standardised financial measures, or trend data …
Read full response →
19 Recommendation Third Report - Delivering the Governmen… Acknowledged

Where benefits will not be apparent immediately on delivery and may only materialise later, there...

Where benefits will not be apparent immediately on delivery and may only materialise later, there should be a mechanism to hold previous ministers and SROs to account after the project has ended. The Chair of the Committee has written to the Chair of Public Accounts Committee (PAC) asking that when … Read more

Government response AI summary
The government states it supports giving evidence to the Public Accounts Committee when requested, implying it will cooperate with existing accountability mechanisms but not explicitly committing to creating a new mechanism for holding *previous* ministers and SROs to account.
Read full response →
20 Conclusion Third Report - Delivering the Governmen… Acknowledged

Projects are hindered by over-optimistic estimates of cost and time schedules, and overstatement of early...

Projects are hindered by over-optimistic estimates of cost and time schedules, and overstatement of early benefits. Ministers are too keen to commit to specific cost and timescales early in the process, and project managers become tied to these estimates. The early estimates can then shape the rest of the project … Read more

Government response AI summary
The government acknowledges the issues of over-optimistic estimates and is working to improve project outcomes through Project Principles, a centralized data platform, and Ministerial training to ensure more consistent cost and timescale estimations across departments.
Read full response →
25 Conclusion Third Report - Delivering the Governmen… Acknowledged

Efforts to address capability are welcome but will take time to take effect.

Efforts to address capability are welcome but will take time to take effect. A scarcity of appropriately experienced people and salary constraints in the public sector contribute to the ongoing problem of shortages, particularly in the SRO role. The Government needs to recognise that capability is a potential constraint on … Read more

Government response AI summary
The government recognised that capability is a constraint on infrastructure plans and highlighted ongoing IPA efforts to improve and accelerate this through recruitment, development, and remuneration, with further consideration planned for the upcoming Spending Review.
Read full response →
29 Conclusion Third Report - Delivering the Governmen… Acknowledged

Good and transparent data is vital for parliamentary and public scrutiny of major projects.

Good and transparent data is vital for parliamentary and public scrutiny of major projects. The Committee has seen examples of projects which have gone off the rails late, having shown little or no sign of difficulty through reported data. The Committee also notes that the standalone data published in IPA … Read more

Government response AI summary
The government asserted it is 'world leading' in major project data publication and described existing transparency measures, while also stating the IPA is taking steps to investigate more robust and expeditious publishing of data.
Read full response →
33 Recommendation Third Report - Delivering the Governmen… Acknowledged

The IPA should consider how it can publish data more quickly—and in particular highlight changes...

The IPA should consider how it can publish data more quickly—and in particular highlight changes to the project, such as increases in costs or delay—so that these issues do not first emerge a year after the fact.. (Paragraph 130) Delivering the Government’s infrastructure commitments through major projects 37 Read more

Government response AI summary
The government agrees on the importance of highlighting project changes quickly and states the IPA will be taking steps to look into publishing data faster, while encouraging departments to publish their own data.
Read full response →

Oral evidence sessions

2 sessions
Date Witnesses
7 Jul 2020 Nick Smallwood · Infrastructure and Projects Authority, Rt Hon Jesse Norman MP · Department for Transport, The Lord Agnew of Oulton DL View ↗
9 Jun 2020 James Heath · National Infrastructure Commission, Professor Henry Overman, Sir John Armitt · National Infrastructure Commission, Tom Thackray · CBI View ↗

Who gave evidence

7 witnesses
WitnessOrganisationSessions
James Heath National Infrastructure Commission 1
Nick Smallwood · CEO Infrastructure and Projects Authority 1
Professor Henry Overman 1
Rt Hon Jesse Norman MP Department for Transport 1
Sir John Armitt · Chair National Infrastructure Commission 1
The Lord Agnew of Oulton DL 1
Tom Thackray · Infrastructure and Energy Policy Lead CBI 1

Correspondence

4 letters
DateDirectionTitle
8 Dec 2020 To cttee Letter from Nic Smallwood, CEO Infrastructure and Projects Authority on Nationa…
17 Nov 2020 To cttee Letter from Lord Agnew, Minister of State HM Treasury and Cabinet Office on Maj…
14 Oct 2020 From cttee Letter to Lord Agnew on Government Response to Committee's third Report dated 1…
29 Apr 2020 To cttee Letter from Gareth Davies, Comptroller and Auditor General, response to PACAC m…

Meetings & visits

1 item
DateTypeDetail
5 May 2020 Formal meeting The Government’s management of its major projects · Virtual meeting