Realising best value for money How can Public Accounts Committees draw attention to government waste and ensure that cost reduction programmes are managed well? Keith Davis, Director of Cross Government Studies

Public Accounts Committees can improve value for money in different ways Sector reports can give evidence on specific cases identify general issues Overall (cross-cutting) reports can set expectations bring out common problems follow up on action taken make a difference across government challenge what has been delivered A series of reports can track progress Apply a consistent framework

Sector reports give evidence on specific cases 2011 report on DWP cost reduction - DWP lacks clear strategy 2011 report on DfID financial management – DfID lacks data to measure value for money

Sector reports allow the Committee to identify issues across departments 2011 report on NHS procurement indicates a wider issue

Overall PAC report can set expectations Key current expectations for Westminster PAC: Departments should think about value for money in the round Officials should be personally accountable for delivering planned improvements Concerns about impact on front-line services

Overall PAC report can set expectations From 2010 VFM savings report From 2007 efficiency progress report

Overall report can bring out common problems Common problems identified by Westminster PAC: Data quality Sustainability of savings Centre not in control Risk of costs being reallocated not saved

Overall report can bring out common problems 2010 Report: centre needs to get a grip 2007 report – data accuracy issue

Overall reports can follow up on action taken

Reports can make a difference across government 2010 Report on consultancy - government response

Reports can challenge what has been delivered

A series of reports can track progress on subjects of perennial concern Consultancy (reports in 2002, 2007, 2010) Property (report in 2008, following up in 2012) Reorganisations (report in 2012 follwing up NAO report in 2010) Procurement (reports in 2004 and 2007, NAO follow-up in 2006, 2010, 2012)

A series of reports can track progress 2007 Report : Progress towards 2008 target 2012 Report: Change in overall spending in Report: Progress towards 2011 savings targets

A series of reports can apply a consistent framework