Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation 10

10

Industry associations stated that the short lead up time, and the Scheme’s six-month window was...

Conclusion
Industry associations stated that the short lead up time, and the Scheme’s six-month window was a challenge for many installers, providing a very short timeframe for them to identify the resources they needed to engage with the scheme, as well as for the installation of measures.26 The Department acknowledged that delivering the intended £1.5 billion of funding was extremely ambitious, and that it could have driven greater job creation by broadening the constraints on measures, however, it wanted to ensure that the scheme was not poor value for money in delivering carbon impacts.27 It also argued that many of the primary measures were labour intensive and stimulating demand for them would also have an impact in supporting jobs, and that where specialist skills were needed firms could hire new staff to work alongside those who were more experienced.28
Government Response

A response document is linked to this report, dated 1 March 2022. Response attribution to this conclusion has not been verified. Read the response document ↗