Source · Select Committees · Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee
Recommendation 19
19
Accepted
Cabinet Office approach lacks rigour and clear rationale for civil service relocation benefits
Conclusion
Beyond the specific design and impacts of these programmes, we were struck by what they revealed about the Cabinet Office’s approach to policy-making. The fact that Civil Service relocation has been pursued by several previous governments provides an historical comparison against which this Government’s approach stands out for its lack of published research, its failure to seriously engage with the trade-offs to be 52 Where Civil Servants Work: Planning for the future of the Government’s estates managed, and its exaggerated approach to progress and benefits. The Cabinet Office’s approach to presentation is particularly disappointing, given it is the responsible department for the Government Analysis Function, Government Communications Service, and Evaluation Task Force—all of which provide guidance to departments on the robustness of policy development or communications. This lack of rigour manifests itself as a vagueness at the heart of this policy, with the Cabinet Office not providing a clear account of why certain functions are being located in particular places, what difference this will make to government policy, or how exactly this will impact on regional communities and their citizens. (Paragraph 99) Where Civil Servants Work: Planning for the future of the Government’s estates 53
Government Response Summary
The government stated that research underpinning the economic benefits of the Places for Growth programme has already been published, responding to the committee's observation about a lack of published research.
Government Response
Accepted
HM Government
Accepted
20. Research underpinning the economic benefits of the Places for Growth programme has already been published.