Recommendation 24

The requests made by BEIS officials for Ministerial Directions to proceed with the early grants schemes made reference to the Department’s inability to predict their impact in advance or construct a business case to normal standards. In particular, they referred to the possibility that some funding might be provided to some businesses that did not need it, or be paid to businesses without preventing their closure and consequent job losses. When we asked whether lessons would be learned from how this played out in practice, HM Treasury told us that “we will look very hard at that question”.55 We asked witnesses about businesses that were not served well, or at all, by the business grant schemes. HM Treasury emphasised that it is important to “to look at the entirety of the support that was given, not just this scheme in isolation.”56 HM Treasury played a central role across the entirety of business support during the pandemic, including schemes where DBT did not have significant involvement; for example some schemes were delivered through HM Revenue & Customs.57 HM Treasury has not committed to publishing the results of any reflections on its part in the decision-making process for this support.58 49 Q 106 50 Q 9 51 Q 15; C&AG’s Report, paras 2.4–2.5, 2.23 and 2.30, and footnote 12 52 Qq 79, 106 53 C&AG’s Report, para 2.33 54 Q 24, 99 55 Ministerial Directions – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk); Q 106 56 Qq 103–104,119 57 Committee of Public Accounts, COVID employment support schemes, Fortieth Report of Session 2022–23, HC 810, 8 March 2023 58 C&AG’s Report, para 2.36 Local authority administered COVID support schemes in England 15 Contingency plans