LABOUR’S flagship plan to drive efficiency in public spending faces questions about its value for money by an influential cross-party group of MPs.
The Treasury Committee has warned that it is “difficult to see” how the Office for Value for Money will have “a meaningful impact” on saving taxpayers’ money.
The Office for Value for Money was set up by Labour last year as part of their efforts to appear fiscally responsible in contrast to the Conservatives.
Chaired by former HS2 director David Goldstone, it is tasked with scrutinising spending and investment proposals across the whole of government.
But the Treasury Committee said much of its work was already being done by existing teams within the UK Government – leading to a “clear risk” that work would be done twice unnecessarily.
In a report published on Monday looking at the purpose of the new office, which sits within the Treasury, the committee said there was “very little information” on how it would carry out key functions and a lack of clarity on who held responsibility for evaluating its effectiveness.
The Government has also been urged to say how much it plans to spend on the Office for Value for Money.
Meg Hillier, the chair of the Treasury Committee, said: “Our committee has concluded the Office for Value for Money is an understaffed, poorly defined organisation which has been set up with a vague remit and no clear plan to measure its effectiveness.
“All of which leads me to feel this initiative may be something of a red herring.
“The Treasury needs to share far more information about what this small team will actually achieve for the taxpayer which cannot be done elsewhere. It must also be transparent about how it will operate and how it will assess its effectiveness.”
A Treasury spokesperson said: “For too long, taxpayer money has been squandered and we are putting an end to it. This office’s role is additional to existing parts of government and will draw on a range of expertise across disciplines to help route out waste, including a focus on where department spending may be overlapping.
“They also sit alongside our wider spending review which is, for the first time in 17 years, reviewing every line of government spending.”
