Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee

Twenty-Fourth Report - Selecting towns for the Towns Fund

Public Accounts Committee HC 651 Published 11 November 2020
Report Status
Government responded
Conclusions & Recommendations
27 items (5 recs)

No response data available yet.

Filter by:

Recommendations

5 results
3

It is unclear how much engagement and intelligence gathering, if any, Ministers held with local...

Recommendation
It is unclear how much engagement and intelligence gathering, if any, Ministers held with local and regional representatives, to inform their selection of towns from the medium- and low-priority groups. Departmental officials assessed towns against three qualitative criteria using the … Read more
HM Treasury
View Details →
4

It is still unclear what impact the Department is expecting from the Towns Fund, or...

Recommendation
It is still unclear what impact the Department is expecting from the Towns Fund, or when, and how the Department will measure its success. Although the Department is positive about the quality of the 13 plans submitted by the first … Read more
HM Treasury
View Details →
6

It is not clear how the Towns Fund fits with other government funding programmes with...

Recommendation
It is not clear how the Towns Fund fits with other government funding programmes with overlapping aims. The Department confirms that, despite the impact of Covid-19 on government spending plans, the £3.6 billion funding allocated to the Towns Fund is … Read more
HM Treasury
View Details →
7

The impact of Covid-19 is likely to mean that some towns’ plans for how best...

Recommendation
The impact of Covid-19 is likely to mean that some towns’ plans for how best to spend the money will need to be revisited. We are very concerned about the short-term and long-term effects of Covid-19 on towns, and high … Read more
HM Treasury
View Details →
12

The Department told us that it is satisfied that the Town Deal Boards are well...

Recommendation
The Department told us that it is satisfied that the Town Deal Boards are well constituted, meeting departmental stipulations, and coming together well. Boards are involving the private sector and the wider social sector, with examples of some Boards being … Read more
HM Treasury
View Details →

Conclusions (22)

Observations and findings
2 Conclusion
The Department has a weak and unconvincing justification for not publishing any information on the process it followed, which does not vindicate its lack of transparency. The Department says that it did not reveal the detail behind its selection of towns so as not to raise local expectations about an …
View Details →
5 Conclusion
We are concerned that towns may not have the capacity to deliver their plans and spend the money well. The Department says that the towns most in need of investment would have been disadvantaged in a competitive bidding process because of a lack of leadership, resources or experience of dealing …
View Details →
1 Conclusion
On the basis of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we took evidence from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (the Department) about the Towns Fund.1
View Details →
8 Conclusion
The Department’s lack of transparency fuelled accusations of political bias in the selection process.16 Furthermore, the Department’s statements to the press, issued after the National Audit Office’s report was published, referred to the report concluding that the selection process had been ‘robust’, whereas the report makes no such statement—which is …
View Details →
9 Conclusion
Other examples of lack of clarity around the Towns Fund process are also of concern to us. The Department gave a confusing explanation for how and why the risks from a no- deal Brexit were assessed by Ministers, when already included in Departmental officials’ assessment. The Department agreed to write …
View Details →
10 Conclusion
We heard from the Department that its officials had assessed each town against three qualitative criteria using the knowledge of its area-based teams, rather than consulting directly with local stakeholders. The Department argued that it gave more weight to the quantitative criteria in its assessment, and that its area-based teams …
View Details →
11 Conclusion
We queried why the Department had required a new tier of governance—Town Deal Boards—to be set up, rather than use existing governance structures to plan and implement the Towns Fund at the local level. The Department explained that existing structures, such as mayoral combined authorities and Local Enterprise Partnerships, were …
View Details →
13 Conclusion
The Department told us that it had not completed its analysis of the 13 plans submitted by the first cohort of towns but its early impressions of the quality of the plans and the range of interventions proposed were positive.30 It described how it was assessing town investment plans against …
View Details →
14 Conclusion
Given our concerns in the past about the Department’s failure to put in place quantifiable objectives to help it measure the impact of its interventions on local economic growth, we asked the Department how it intended to approach this for the Towns Fund, to properly measure impacts such as job …
View Details →
15 Conclusion
The Department told us that it is looking to probe each project to gauge how convinced it is that towns can deliver their plans successfully, and that it will build in robust monitoring and evaluation processes from the start, agreeing key outputs and outcomes such as jobs created and footfall …
View Details →
16 Conclusion
The Department’s rationale for opting for “a deals-based approach” to funding, rather than a competitive bidding process, was because towns most in need of investment would have been disadvantaged in a competitive bidding process due to a lack of leadership, resources or experience of dealing with government departments. The Department …
View Details →
17 Conclusion
The Department further told us that it had entered into a contract worth around £8 million with Arup, a professional services company, to provide towns with specific expertise in areas such as real estate valuation. The Department described the efficiency benefits it envisages in such an arrangement, whereby towns will …
View Details →
18 Conclusion
The Department told us that it is working at pace to agree the funding that will be available for the 13 towns in the first cohort and would like to be able to make decisions in October. But the Department did not want to guarantee it would meet that deadline …
View Details →
19 Conclusion
The Department has developed a funding profile for the Towns Fund over the next four financial years but does not know yet whether it aligns with towns’ individual investment plans. The Department explained that it wants the profile of funding over time to be led by what works in terms …
View Details →
20 Conclusion
The £3.6 billion Towns Fund has three separate strands of funding comprising: • The 101 selected towns invited to develop Town Deals and bid for up to £25 million each, or up to £50 million in exceptional circumstances; • A competition for funding for those towns not in the initial …
View Details →
21 Conclusion
The Department confirmed that, despite the impact of Covid-19 on government spending plans, the £3.6 billion funding allocated to the Towns Fund is secure. It told us that it had no plans to do anything other than continue with the Towns Fund and to deliver the fund in a way …
View Details →
22 Conclusion
We asked the Department whether, given the scale of change happening, it will bid for higher levels of funding to support the Future High Streets Fund. It explained that, as many of the towns that are eligible for Future High Streets funding are also eligible for Towns Fund funding, it …
View Details →
23 Conclusion
The Department told us that many of the bids are aligned with other funds, both from central and local government, and highlighted the importance of aligning the Towns Fund projects with other interventions.48 But the specific aims of the Towns Fund and how it fits with other, similar programmes of …
View Details →
24 Conclusion
A consistent theme highlighted in the town plans that the Department has seen so far is the impact of Covid-19, leading towns to think about a more diverse range of uses for the high street. The Department told us that its guidance steers towns to think carefully about investments that …
View Details →
25 Conclusion
How the impact of Covid-19 will influence decisions about how the Department allocates the Towns Fund is unclear. Whether towns that have been adversely affected by Covid-19 will have a greater likelihood of selection, or whether events may mean that some of the plans set out in winning bids are …
View Details →
26 Conclusion
The Department explained that because of Covid-19 and the recent demands that have been placed on local government, the private sector and other members of the Town Deal Boards, it has left towns and the Town Deal Boards to determine which wave of funding they wanted to work towards.51 While …
View Details →
27 Conclusion
The Department has brought forward £80 million of the Towns Fund, with each eligible town receiving between £500,000 and £1 million for projects that will make a difference to the area, such as new green spaces, the creation of pop-up businesses spaces, pedestrianisation of streets to encourage walking or cycling, …
View Details →