Source · Select Committees · Treasury Committee
Recommendation 1
1
Acknowledged
Paragraph: 18
Witnesses were mostly unpersuaded by the Government’s arguments for the abolition of the Industrial Strategy...
Conclusion
Witnesses were mostly unpersuaded by the Government’s arguments for the abolition of the Industrial Strategy and its replacement with the Plan for Growth. More importantly, we are particularly concerned at the ‘chop and change’ and lack of long-termism in growth strategy and policy, without which businesses themselves are unable to plan and invest themselves. This churn also makes it difficult to assess the success or otherwise of initiatives such as the Industrial Strategy in improving growth and productivity.
Government Response Summary
The government states that the Plan for Growth is an overarching framework supporting a whole-Government approach to delivering long-term growth, with departments reporting progress quarterly.
Paragraph Reference:
18
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
This section is addressing recommendations in paragraph 44 and 45 on making the Plan for Growth a successor to the Industrial Strategy, coordinating growth strategy across government, taking feedback and monitoring results to measure success. The Plan for Growth, while led by HM Treasury, is an overarching framework which helps to support a whole-Government approach to delivering long-term growth. The Plan for Growth is supported by a family of strategies, such as the ‘National Infrastructure Strategy’, ‘Skills for Jobs’ and the ‘Innovation Strategy’, each led by respective lead government departments. Outcome Delivery Plans (ODP) are the primary way in which departments’ progress against their core policy objectives and outcomes is measured, including where they are responsible for delivering elements of the Plan for Growth. There are measures across each strategic objective outlined in the Plan for Growth, including boosting connectivity, unleashing innovation and closing the regional attainment gap. Departments are required to report their progress to Cabinet Office and HM Treasury on a quarterly basis. These outcome focused metrics are discussed by departments and their corresponding HM Treasury spending teams and factor into discussions on funding settlement decisions. In addition, projects which are part of the Government Major Projects Portfolio–due to their value, significance, or novel nature–are subject to a regular monitoring regime involving the Infrastructure and Projects Authority, Cabinet Office and HM Treasury. This follows and supplements the usual HM Treasury process for scrutinising proposals, including the Treasury Approval Panels and spending control processes.