Select committee: Treasury Committee

Work of the Office for Value for Money

Open Opened 4 Dec 2024 1 recommendation 7 conclusions

Where it stands

The inquiry is open, opened 4 December 2024.

The committee has published 1 report, most recently 1st Report - The Office for Value for Money on 20 January 2025.

The government's response

No government response linked yet: deadline 20 March 2025, 591 days ago.

Recommendations and conclusions 8 shown

1: Provide comprehensive cost estimates and actual expenditures for the new Office for Value for Money.

Conclusion · 1st Report - The Office for Value for Money · Addressed to HM Treasury

Concluded (the committee's words)
The Treasury must provide an estimate of how much the OVfM will cost including the cost of any external consultants it intends to procure, and then provide the actual cost of OVfM after it completes its initial work. (Recommendation, Paragraph 6) Duplication

Link to this item · Read this item

2: Explain how the Office for Value for Money will integrate with existing government VFM bodies.

Conclusion · 1st Report - The Office for Value for Money · Addressed to HM Treasury

Concluded (the committee's words)
The OVfM must explain how it will interact with existing organisations and frameworks in government and the public sector that are already tasked with delivering value for money to avoid unnecessary duplication and to utilise existing expertise. (Recommendation, Paragraph 11) Value for money studies

Link to this item · Read this item

4: Clarify OVfM's scrutiny process for investment proposals, including selection criteria and methods.

Conclusion · 1st Report - The Office for Value for Money · Addressed to HM Treasury

Concluded (the committee's words)
The Treasury must clarify how the OVfM will scrutinise investment proposals in the Spending Review process. This should include the criteria by which the OVfM selects investment proposals for scrutiny. The Treasury should also provide the method by which such investment proposals will be scrutinised, including the time horizon over which projected savings will be assessed. In addition, the Treasury must clarify how it will handle proposals where impact is not easy to quantify using existing economic methods. This may include spend-to-save measures. The Treasury must also clarify what scrutiny will be applied (if any) to investment proposals that are not selected for assessment by the OVfM. (Recommendation, Paragraph 19) 10 Evaluation

Link to this item · Read this item

6: Mandate the Treasury to set out OVfM recommendations, acceptance decisions, and implementation monitoring.

Recommendation · 1st Report - The Office for Value for Money · Addressed to HM Treasury

Recommended (the committee's words)
To maximise concrete outcomes from this project, the OVfM must specify before it is disbanded which parts of the Government should take responsibility for implementing its recommendations and by what timetable. To that end, the Treasury must set out the OVfM’s recommendations; which of them it accepts or rejects; the reasons for such acceptance or rejection; and specify how it will monitor the effectiveness of the implementation of the OVfM’s recommendations. Based on learning, the OVfM should also recommend any improvements to existing structures and frameworks which currently aim to evaluate and deliver value for money across the Government. (Recommendation, Paragraph 23)

Link to this item · Read this item

7: OVfM's task to drive efficiency improvements is challenging due to limited resources.

Conclusion · 1st Report - The Office for Value for Money · Addressed to HM Treasury

Concluded (the committee's words)
The OVfM’s task is challenging because it is lightly resourced, and it has only a very short period of time to drive tangible improvements in efficiency in departments’ spending during the Spending Review period. Its worth will depend on its ability to identify and to deliver meaningful, original new ways of securing value for money in public spending. (Conclusion, Paragraph 24)

Link to this item · Read this item

Reports

1 report

Oral evidence sessions

1 session

On smaller screens, scroll horizontally to read every column. Keyboard users can focus the table region and use the arrow keys.

Date Session and witnesses Source
11 Dec 2024
Oral evidence session
Andrew Wood · The Office for Value for Money, HM Treasury, David Goldstone CBE · Palace of Westminster Restoration and Renewal Delivery Authority, Johanna Harston · The Office for Value for Money, HM Treasury
View ↗

Who gave evidence

3 witnesses

On smaller screens, scroll horizontally to read every column. Keyboard users can focus the table region and use the arrow keys.

WitnessOrganisationSessions
Andrew Wood · Deputy Director The Office for Value for Money, HM Treasury 1
David Goldstone CBE · Chief Executive Palace of Westminster Restoration and Renewal Delivery Authority 1
Johanna Harston · Director The Office for Value for Money, HM Treasury 1

Correspondence

1 letter

On smaller screens, scroll horizontally to read every column. Keyboard users can focus the table region and use the arrow keys.