How can Govt get better at delivering major projects?
Major projects such as HS2 and the New Hospital Programme are examples of projects that indicate there is a problem with governance in Whitehall. The National Audit Office (NAO) has suggested that the largest, riskiest and most complex major projects, which it defined as ‘mega projects’, are arguably too large for their risks to be manageable by the relevant departments and arms-length bodies. Each phase of these kinds of mega-project is likely to be more complex and uncertain, with a greater likelihood for decisions to be reopened, and multiple stakeholders involved.
Meeting details
The PAC’s evidence session will hear from senior officials at HM Treasury and the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority, as well as from David Goldstone, the independent Chair of the recently-established Office for Value for Money. It will explore why so many problems are regularly seen with governance, oversight and decision-making on the biggest projects, as well as whether HM Treasury should take more ownership and accountability for major projects as their ultimate funder.
The NAO further found that there is often political pressure on major projects to get started quickly, sometimes so that progress can be announced, or to fit a spending review or electoral cycle. This can mean that it is often not possible for decision-makers to fully understand a project’s risk and uncertainty, and the PAC will likely explore how such projects can be announced and committed to only once they are known to be feasible.