Recommendations & Conclusions
4 items
3
Recommendation
Twenty-First Report - Government suppor…
Rejected
The Department for International Trade’s contribution to export performance is unclear because of a lack of robust metrics. It is important for any public body to be clear about and accountable for what it is trying to achieve, and the criteria it will use to judge whether it is being …
Read more
The Department for International Trade’s contribution to export performance is unclear because of a lack of robust metrics. It is important for any public body to be clear about and accountable for what it is trying to achieve, and the criteria it will use to judge whether it is being successful, including performance information that allows Parliament and the taxpayer to understand how effective they are and what impact they are having. However, the government has not set a timescale for achieving its export growth ambition to increase from 30% to 35% of GDP, and the target is dependent on multiple factors such as economic conditions and contributions from other parties including independent efforts by UK industry. The Department measures its annual exports performance through its ‘export wins’ measure but this target does not encourage it to focus on longer-term export growth. The Department was unable to provide us with details of other measures that cover the broad scope of its role in supporting exports, such as removing market access barriers. The Department says that it aims to develop better measures for understanding the impact of FTAs and to help it target specific markets. Recommendation: By the end of 2020, the Department should set out longer- term outcome measures that enable us, Parliament and the taxpayer to hold it to account for its impact on exports, and which capture the full range of its activities to support exports. Measures should include supporting exports, such as removing market access barriers, including better international comparators, the impact of free trade agreements and the number of exporters. DIT’s performance against all measures, existing and new, should be reported transparently.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government explicitly rejects this recommendation, stating it already publishes a balanced suite of metrics and is developing more for priority outcomes. It will not commit to publishing any specific additional metrics until their robustness and accuracy are confirmed.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
11
Conclusion
Twenty-First Report - Government suppor…
Rejected
In 2018, the Government announced its export strategy and an ambition to raise exports as a proportion of GDP from 30% to 35%.24 This committee has recently highlighted how important it is for any public body to be clear about and accountable for what it is trying to achieve, and …
Read more
In 2018, the Government announced its export strategy and an ambition to raise exports as a proportion of GDP from 30% to 35%.24 This committee has recently highlighted how important it is for any public body to be clear about and accountable for what it is trying to achieve, and the criteria it will use to judge whether it is being successful. Furthermore, we emphasised the need for performance information that helps public bodies understand how effective they are and what impact they are having, so they can judge progress and take corrective action when they are not on track.25 However, the Government has not set a timescale for achieving its export growth ambition, and the 35% 16 Q 54 17 Q 24 18 Q 70 19 Q 67 20 Qq 40, 41 21 C&AG’s Report, para 2.14. 22 Federation of Small Businesses written evidence to the Public Accounts Committee inquiry into Government support for UK exporters, 11 September 2020, para 11 23 Q 69 24 C&AG’s Report, para 13 25 Committee of Public Accounts, 107th Report, 2017–19, Consumer Protection, 12 July 2019, HC 1752 12 Government support for UK exporters target is dependent on contributions from other parties including independent efforts by UK industry.26 In our view, the measure is not satisfactory because it can also be affected by fluctuations in GDP.27
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government explicitly disagrees, stating it already publishes a balanced suite of export performance indicators and has developed a framework including a theory of change. It will not commit to publishing additional metrics until they are robust and accurate, effectively rejecting the committee's implicit call …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
12
Conclusion
Twenty-First Report - Government suppor…
Rejected
The Department informed us that it has a “raft of other measures” that it could be measured against, including international comparators. It highlighted its ‘export wins’ measure, which is the value of exports that it thinks it has directly contributed to, as determined and agreed by the companies that it …
Read more
The Department informed us that it has a “raft of other measures” that it could be measured against, including international comparators. It highlighted its ‘export wins’ measure, which is the value of exports that it thinks it has directly contributed to, as determined and agreed by the companies that it has helped.28 However, the Department’s annual export wins target has limitations because it focuses efforts on short-term export support rather than on longer-term activities that are needed to grow exports. Activities that require a longer timeframe (for example, building capacity in domestic supply chains and understanding the impacts of addressing market barriers) are not currently captured in the Department’s metrics.29 The Department said that there may not be a single measure that provides a link between its own contributions, export performance and UK prosperity. It plans to develop new performance metrics that will help it to understand the impact of Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), and to segment and target support better to individual companies.30
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government explicitly disagrees, stating it already publishes a balanced suite of metrics and is developing more for priority outcomes. It commits to developing a better understanding of its impact but will not commit to publishing any specific additional metrics until their robustness is confirmed.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
13
Conclusion
Twenty-First Report - Government suppor…
Rejected
The Department told us that it has recently introduced a value for money model to assess the impact of its different interventions, but it is still relatively new. It recognised that there is work to do to improve its overall evidence base, particularly how exports change over time, and to …
Read more
The Department told us that it has recently introduced a value for money model to assess the impact of its different interventions, but it is still relatively new. It recognised that there is work to do to improve its overall evidence base, particularly how exports change over time, and to make sure that it understands the long-term impacts of its interventions.31 26 C&AG’s Report, paras 13, 1.16 27 Q 21 28 Q 21 29 C&AG’s Report, paras 22, 3.13 30 Qq 18, 22 31 Q 30 Government support for UK exporters 13 2 Supporting smaller businesses to export The challenges that small businesses face when they export
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government explicitly disagrees with the implied recommendation, stating it already publishes a balanced suite of export performance metrics and is developing a theory of change. It commits to developing a better understanding of its impact but will not commit to publishing any specific additional …
Read full response →
HM Treasury