Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation 15
15
On 14 June 2022, the Commissions published the areas where they sought the Houses agreement.
Conclusion
On 14 June 2022, the Commissions published the areas where they sought the Houses agreement. This included that the Sponsor Body should be replaced, and that the sponsorship function, now termed client function, would be brought in-house to Parliament for these early programme stages. In practice, the Clerks of the two Houses would take over responsibility for the sponsor function as Accounting Officers, with the Delivery Authority unchanged. They proposed a two-tier governance structure including a client board, bringing together the two Commissions, and a small programme board as a joint board of the two Houses with delegated authority from the Client Board.39
Government Response
Not Addressed
HM Government
Not Addressed
This recommendation is for Parliament. Target implementation date: this recommendation is for Parliament; the relevant date is that of the debates in each House later this month, and subsequently the date of debates on the required regulations. Initial options relating to the governance 39 arrangements for the delivery phase of the programme will be considered as part of the strategic case put to Parliament. The Committee’s recommendation is for Parliament itself. It is therefore not for the Accounting Officers to give a substantive response. However, the Commissions have provided a report to both Houses in order to support their decision-making. In preparing this report the Commissions sought advice from an Independent Advice and Assurance Panel on what would be the best sponsorship model— in-house or a different arm’s length body—for the R&R programme during the remainder of the definition stage (the period from now up to agreement of the strategic case) and during the subsequent programme delivery phase. The Panel’s advice on this matter is included in paragraphs 6-16 of their report, which was published in full at Annex D of the Commissions’ June Report. The Commissions, taking into account the Panel’s report, set out their reasoning and recommendation in paragraphs 27-31 of their report. The Panel concluded that the governance model for the delivery phase will need to be separately considered and confirmed after the scope and preferred delivery strategy is agreed. In line with HMT Green Book processes, governance structures will be considered in the development of the strategic case, to be decided on by the two Houses.