Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation 6
6
Policies designed to create additional capacity quickly, while necessary, have resulted in a lack of...
Conclusion
Policies designed to create additional capacity quickly, while necessary, have resulted in a lack of transparency about costs and value for money. The NHS boosted its potential maximum capacity for the peak in April by building Nightingale hospitals across the country and signing contracts with independent providers for 8,000 additional beds, which was announced on 21 March. The contract ended on the 28 June. The Department expects to continue these arrangements in anticipation of future peaks. However, we are concerned by the scarcity of information on contracts and costs. When asked, NHSE&I was unable, or unwilling, to provide any estimate of the cost of private sector capacity or the Nightingale hospitals. We are fortunate that the Nightingale hospitals have not been required so far during the pandemic, but it will not be a good use of public money if we continue to let them remain empty while elsewhere the NHS requires additional capacity for normal services. Recommendation: After failing to provide detail in the session, it is imperative that the Department and NHSE&I write to the Committee as soon as possible – and no later than 1 September 2020—with information on the cost of private hospital contracts, how these have been used, and their intentions for how private and Nightingale hospitals will be made best use of in the coming months, including: • details of what the second phase of contracts will provide; • the total cost and pricing mechanisms; and • how capacity in these hospitals will be allocated? They should come to subsequent sessions prepared to disclose cost information on key elements of the pandemic response. Readying the NHS and social care for the COVID-19 peak 9 1 Lessons from the NHS and adult social care response to the COVID-19 pandemic
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
19. Nineteenth Report of Session 2019-21 The Sponsor Body (for the Restoration and Renewal of the Palace of Westminster) Restoration and renewal of the Palace of Westminster Introduction from the Committee After over 20 years of discussion, in January 2018, Parliament approved the Restoration and Renewal Programme (the Programme) to deliver the significant work needed to repair the Palace of Westminster, and to meet wider objectives such as improving accessibility and providing educational facilities. The Parliamentary Buildings (Restoration and Renewal) Act 2019 (the Act) set out how the Programme would be managed from April 2020. It established a new Sponsor Body which is responsible for the strategic direction of the Programme and oversees a Delivery Authority, which is responsible for undertaking the works. Both the Sponsor Body and Delivery Authority are accountable to Parliament, which will continue to be the main user of the Palace once it is repaired but, under the Act, Parliament will not run the Programme itself. Instead, members of the House of Commons and the House of Lords will be asked to approve the business case presented by the Sponsor Body and will be responsible for approving and scrutinising the funding for the works. The Programme is at an early stage and is also dependent on other refurbishment projects across the wider Parliamentary estate also being delivered on time Based on a report by the National Audit Office, the Committee took evidence, on 21 July 2020 from the Parliamentary Works Sponsor Body; House of Commons; House of Lords and the Parliamentary Works Delivery Authority. The Committee published its report on 2 October 2020. Relevant reports • NAO report: Palace of Westminster Restoration and Renewal Programme - Session 2019–21 (HC 315) • PAC report: Restoration and renewal of the Palace of Westminster - Session 2019-21 (HC 549) Responses to the Committee The Sponsor Body is not a government body so will provide responses to the recommendations in the PAC report directly to the Committee. Treasury Minutes Archive1 Treasury Minutes are the government’s response to reports from the Committee of Public Accounts. Treasury Minutes are Command Papers laid in Parliament. Session 2019-21 Committee Recommendations: 113 Recommendations agreed: 105 (93%) Recommendations disagreed: 8 Publication Date PAC Reports Ref Number July 2020 Government response to PAC reports 1-6 CP 270 September 2020 Government responses to PAC reports 7-13 CP 291 November 2020 Government responses to PAC reports 14-17 and 19 CP 316 Session 2019 Committee Recommendations: 11 Recommendations agreed: 11 (100%) Recommendations disagreed: 0 Publication Date PAC Reports Ref Number January 2020 Government response to PAC report [112-119] 1 and 2 CP 210 Session 2017-19 Committee Recommendations: 747 Recommendations agreed: 675 (90%) Recommendations disagreed: 72 (10%) Publication Date PAC Reports Ref Number December 2017 Government response to PAC report 1 Cm 9549 January 2018 Government responses to PAC reports 2 and 3 Cm 9565 March 2018 Government responses to PAC reports 4-11 Cm 9575 March 2018 Government responses to PAC reports 12-19 Cm 9596 May 2018 Government responses to PAC reports 20-30 Cm 9618 June 2018 Government responses to PAC reports 31-37 Cm 9643 July 2018 Government responses to PAC reports 38-42 Cm 9667 October 2018 Government responses to PAC reports 43-58 Cm 9702 December 2018 Government responses to PAC reports 59-63 Cm 9740 January 2019 Government responses to PAC reports 64-68 CP 18 March 2019 Government responses to PAC reports 69-71 CP 56 April 2019 Government responses to PAC reports 72-77 CP 79 May 2019 Government responses to PAC reports 78-81 and 83-85 CP 97 June 2019 Government responses to PAC reports 82, 86-92 CP 113 July 2019 Government responses to PAC reports 93-94 and 96-98 CP 151 October 2019 Government responses to PAC reports 95, 99-111 CP 176 January 2020 Government response to PAC report 112-119 [1 and 2] CP 210 1 List of Treasury Minutes responses for Sessions 2010-15 are annexed in the Government’s response to PAC Report 52 Session 2016-17 Committee Recommendations: 393 Recommendations agreed: 356 (91%) Recommendations disagreed: 37 (9%) Publication Date PAC Reports Ref Number November 2016 Government responses to PAC reports 1-13 Cm 9351 December 2016 Government responses to PAC reports 14-21 Cm 9389 February 2017 Government responses to PAC reports 22-25 and 28 Cm 9413 March 2017 Government responses to PAC reports 26-27 and 29-342 Cm 9429 March 2017 Government responses to PAC reports 35-41 Cm 9433 October 2017 Government responses to PAC reports 42-44 and 46-64 Cm 9505 Session 2015-16 Committee Recommendations: 262 Recommendations agreed: 225 (86%) Recommendations disagreed: 37 (14%) Publication Date PAC Reports Ref Number December 2015 Government responses to PAC reports 1 to 3 Cm 9170 January 2016 Government responses to PAC reports 4 to 8 Cm 9190 March 2016 Government