Conclusion 3

Departmental counter-fraud staff often lack the credibility and authority needed to exert influence at senior levels. Historically, counter-fraud experts have focused on investigating suspected fraud and have not been brought into wider policy making and design. Many departments lack senior counter-fraud professionals with influence in their organisations and counter-fraud staff have often struggled to get the attention, understanding and support needed from senior decision-makers. In part, this is because the counter-fraud profession itself is relatively young and needs time to reinforce itself as a function. But many of those working in the counter- fraud function are not members of the profession and have not been trained or assessed against the professional standards. The Cabinet Office and HM Treasury have said that government will conduct annual workforce and performance reviews to provide insights on areas outside tax and welfare that demand attention and support. HM Treasury, starting with an expectation of a return of £3 for every £1 spent, also says that it will, where possible, expect increasing returns on its counter- fraud investments. Recommendation 3: The Public Sector Fraud Authority should: a) update the Committee in 12 months on the outcomes of its next annual Workforce and Performance Review and whether public bodies start to invest the right amount in their counter-fraud and corruption capability and achieve value for money from their efforts. b) set out what it has done to address any identified weaknesses in the effectiveness of departments’ efforts to tackle fraud and corruption, including their understanding of risks, resourcing of counter-fraud and delivery of counter-fraud outcomes.