Plan To Save £159m Costs Whitehall £1.4bn

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Plan To Save £159m Costs Whitehall £1.4bn

Post by Guest on Wed Mar 07, 2012 10:12 am

A Whitehall efficiency drive to cut £159m across government departments ended up costing £1.4bn, according to a public spending watchdog.
The seven-year programme to share "back-office" functions including personnel departments and procurement backfired, the National Audit Office found.
In a damning report, the watchdog said private sector firms usually manage to slash their annual spend by a fifth by using similar methods.
They blame poor co-ordination, costly IT systems, weak sanctions and demands for tailored services for the spiralling costs.
Waste Watch has chronicled many troubling examples of how taxpayers' money is being spent. But even regular blog readers will be surprised to hear that a Whitehall efficiency drive set up to combat waste has spent MORE than it saved.
Sophy Ridge looks at government spending
Some of the departments failed to monitor how much the changes cost or saved.
Sharing back-office functions such as payroll was recommended in a 2004 review into how to slash costs. As a result, eight projects were set up.
The NAO examined five of them, and found they cost £500m more than expected - £1.4bn instead of £0.9bn.
At the Department for Transport, the efficiency programme cost £129m more to set up and run than it saved. A Research Councils UK project led to a net cost to the taxpayer of £126m.
The Department for Work and Pensions and the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs did not track whether the overhaul saved cash.
Officials at the Ministry of Justice did, and found their project saved £33m a year and broke even ahead of schedule, so they stopped monitoring performance.
The NAO concluded so far the "shared-services initiative has not so far delivered value for money for the taxpayer".
Amyas Morse, the head of the NAO, blamed "over-complexity, reduced flexibility and a failure to cut costs".

Margaret Hodge MP said the problem was "shockingly familiar"

But he acknowledged the Cabinet Office has taken some steps to remedy this and take greater control of the project.
A Cabinet Office spokesperson told Sky News there will be "no stone unturned" in the hunt for savings.
"The Government has already announced a new approach to shared services that will cut through the complexity in the current system and save money for taxpayers.
"The Government is committed to the correct management of major government projects which previously have not always delivered what they set out to achieve."
Tough new controls were introduced in 2010 to ensure value for money for taxpayers, the spokesperson added.
Margaret Hodge, who chairs the Commons Public Accounts Committee, described it as a "shockingly familiar story of spiralling costs".
"The Shared Service Initiative started out filled with good intentions to save money and reduce duplication of back-office functions across Whitehall. This has not been delivered," she said.
"Departments lost sight of their overall objective to save money. Departments ordered tailor-made systems which have cost the taxpayer too much.
"The Cabinet Office is now committed to bring this initiative back under control but it may be too little, too late to achieve value for money," she added.

http://news.sky.com/home/politics/article/16183887


Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Plan To Save £159m Costs Whitehall £1.4bn

Post by Guest on Wed Mar 07, 2012 11:37 am

The books would be easy to balance. Instead of making cuts of £159 million costing £ 1.4 Billion in the public sector. They could effect cuts of £ 1.5 Billion for the same cost. So making a profit to the taxpayer of £ 0.1 Billion. -- Simples!!!!!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Plan To Save £159m Costs Whitehall £1.4bn

Post by Guest on Wed Mar 07, 2012 7:14 pm

Nems Again wrote:A Whitehall efficiency drive to cut £159m across government departments ended up costing £1.4bn, according to a public spending watchdog.
The seven-year programme to share "back-office" functions including personnel departments and procurement backfired, the National Audit Office found.
In a damning report, the watchdog said private sector firms usually manage to slash their annual spend by a fifth by using similar methods.
They blame poor co-ordination, costly IT systems, weak sanctions and demands for tailored services for the spiralling costs.
Waste Watch has chronicled many troubling examples of how taxpayers' money is being spent. But even regular blog readers will be surprised to hear that a Whitehall efficiency drive set up to combat waste has spent MORE than it saved.
Sophy Ridge looks at government spending
Some of the departments failed to monitor how much the changes cost or saved.
Sharing back-office functions such as payroll was recommended in a 2004 review into how to slash costs. As a result, eight projects were set up.
The NAO examined five of them, and found they cost £500m more than expected - £1.4bn instead of £0.9bn.
At the Department for Transport, the efficiency programme cost £129m more to set up and run than it saved. A Research Councils UK project led to a net cost to the taxpayer of £126m.
The Department for Work and Pensions and the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs did not track whether the overhaul saved cash.
Officials at the Ministry of Justice did, and found their project saved £33m a year and broke even ahead of schedule, so they stopped monitoring performance.
The NAO concluded so far the "shared-services initiative has not so far delivered value for money for the taxpayer".
Amyas Morse, the head of the NAO, blamed "over-complexity, reduced flexibility and a failure to cut costs".

Margaret Hodge MP said the problem was "shockingly familiar"

But he acknowledged the Cabinet Office has taken some steps to remedy this and take greater control of the project.
A Cabinet Office spokesperson told Sky News there will be "no stone unturned" in the hunt for savings.
"The Government has already announced a new approach to shared services that will cut through the complexity in the current system and save money for taxpayers.
"The Government is committed to the correct management of major government projects which previously have not always delivered what they set out to achieve."
Tough new controls were introduced in 2010 to ensure value for money for taxpayers, the spokesperson added.
Margaret Hodge, who chairs the Commons Public Accounts Committee, described it as a "shockingly familiar story of spiralling costs".
"The Shared Service Initiative started out filled with good intentions to save money and reduce duplication of back-office functions across Whitehall. This has not been delivered," she said.
"Departments lost sight of their overall objective to save money. Departments ordered tailor-made systems which have cost the taxpayer too much.
"The Cabinet Office is now committed to bring this initiative back under control but it may be too little, too late to achieve value for money," she added.

http://news.sky.com/home/politics/article/16183887


They haven't got a bloody clue, have they? Character

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Plan To Save £159m Costs Whitehall £1.4bn

Post by Guest on Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:19 pm

Guest wrote:

They haven't got a bloody clue, have they? Character
governments change and the civil service don`t
unfortunately the civil service couldn`t run a bath its been like that for at least a hundred years
it odd that every body complains about equipment shortages wasted money for a spanner costing £100 ect ect then blames the government in power yet it`s actually the civil service screwing it all up


forget voting for MP`s we should be voting for the people who actually run the civil service and hold them account for the continuing stupidity and waste

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Plan To Save £159m Costs Whitehall £1.4bn

Post by Guest on Mon Mar 19, 2012 10:05 am

TTS wrote:governments change and the civil service don`t
unfortunately the civil service couldn`t run a bath its been like that for at least a hundred years
it odd that every body complains about equipment shortages wasted money for a spanner costing £100 ect ect then blames the government in power yet it`s actually the civil service screwing it all up


forget voting for MP`s we should be voting for the people who actually run the civil service and hold them account for the continuing stupidity and waste


I have to agree with your views on the civil service. It is the most bloated, inefficient and financially corrupt organisation in the country. Time for a cull of the management grades. Those grades could be reduced by 70% and the country would still be able to function.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Plan To Save £159m Costs Whitehall £1.4bn

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum