Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation 36
36
For government major programmes, Accounting Officers are expected to assess the delivery risks, publishing a...
Conclusion
For government major programmes, Accounting Officers are expected to assess the delivery risks, publishing a summary of this assessment, and seek a ministerial direction should they consider a decision they are being asked to implement compromises value for money.94 In 2020 the Speaker of the House introduced a procedure, modelled on this, for parliamentary work where the Clerk of the House could place a statement of his views in the Library.95 The Clerk of the House would become Accounting Officer for restoration works should the House administrations oversee this work. The current Accounting Officer for the Programme is the CEO of the Sponsor Body.96 We noted our concern that the Clerks might feel hampered in making their professional views clear because of the complex governance structures of the UK Parliament.97 Neither the Clerk of the House nor the Clerk of the Parliaments have made clear publicly their own views on what programme of work could be delivered.98
Government Response
Not Addressed
HM Government
Not Addressed
The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments broadly agree with the Committee’s recommendation Target implementation: not applicable, as this recommendation is ongoing. The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments are very aware of the importance of their roles as Accounting Officers and the importance of ensuring value for money and efficient and effective use of taxpayers’ money. The letter referred to in the PAC report concerns House of Commons procedure: where the Speaker of the House of Commons takes a decision which the Clerk of the House feels “comprises a substantial breach of the Standing Orders or a departure from long-established conventions without appropriate authorisation by the House itself”, the Clerk may place a note expressing this view in the Library of the House. This relates to the procedural and constitutional advice the Clerk of the House gives to the Speaker of the House of Commons, as opposed to any advice the Clerk of the House gives in his role as Accounting Officer or Corporate Officer. There is no such protocol in the House of Lords. There is no equivalent mechanism currently for advice provided by the Clerk of the House to the Commission in his role of Accounting Officer or Corporate Officer to be put in the public domain, but as a non-voting member of the Commission the Clerk has a forum to ensure his views are heard and minuted. It would be for the Commissions to decide whether to publish any advice submitted to them. The Independent Advice and Assurance Panel that provided advice to the Commissions of both Houses in May 2022 was made up of four independent programme experts with no prior involvement in the decisions relating to the Restoration and Renewal Programme and no vested interests in the outcome of the Commissions’ report and recommendations. Their details are provided in Annex C of the Commissions’ report. The panel were able to speak to whomsoever they required across Parliament and the R&R statutory bodies and review any information they requested. Any future Independent Advice and Assurance Panels convened for this programme will continue to comprise of independent and objective experts. The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments commit to publishing the outcome of any future Independent Advice and Assurance Panels that they commission subject to the agreement of the Commissions, acting as the Client Board. Publication will be subject to the usual protocols for redacting information, if necessary, for example for security or commercial reasons.