MPs query ‘haphazard’ method to shifting civil servants from London
T
he Government has supplied restricted element on the justification for shifting civil servants out of Whitehall and exaggerated the success of the flagship aspect of levelling up coverage, MPs have stated.
The cross-party Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee stated key bulletins on the programme have been made in a “somewhat piecemeal fashion” with out accompanying particulars of the coverage’s rationale, targets, prices and advantages.
This “striking” lack of printed data on the relocation coverage hinders scrutiny of its “design and progress” and makes it exhausting to evaluate whether or not the relocation goal is “sufficiently ambitious, or indeed realistic”, the committee concluded.
The Government goals to open 30 regional hubs, largely in cities exterior London, whereas closing older regional places of work across the UK.
The report stated the Government has not supplied satisfactory evaluation on each the financial influence on cities the place places of work are axed and the advantages to areas internet hosting new hubs.
A goal to relocate 22,000 civil service posts away from London by 2030 has been set beneath the locations for development programme.
In March this 12 months, it was introduced that 11,000 civil servants had been relocated.
However, the report stated whereas the determine signifies good progress, an absence of clear data “makes it difficult to judge how substantial achievements are”.
The committee highlighted an absence of readability on the Government’s definition of a relocated publish created a danger of “confusion over what it is committing to achieve”.
It was typically assumed the general variety of civil servants in London must fall to succeed in the 22,000 goal for relocations.
However, with the amount of London-based civil servants persevering with to rise, the Cabinet Office confirmed to the committee that the goal doesn’t take into consideration “other activities” that may result in a rise in officers within the capital.
Therefore, the Government is just not committing to scale back the entire variety of civil servants in London by 22,000 from a baseline stage set in a selected 12 months.
This means the goal is essentially being achieved by recruiting new civil servants to vacancies in regional places of work moderately than shifting officers out of Whitehall.
In a few of its communications the Cabinet Office is adopting a boosterish method to reporting progress, which is probably going to present an exaggerated image of its achievements
The report stated the Government is “essentially relying on a counterfactual narrative that all the posts newly recruited to regional offices… would have been filled in London if not for the programme”.
“This makes external scrutiny of the Government’s self-reported progress difficult,” it added.
Under the locations for development plan, the Government has additionally dedicated to making sure 50% of senior civil service roles can be primarily based exterior London by 2030.
The report stated the Government “appears to be moving in the right direction, albeit slowly” to reaching this goal, with 255 senior roles relocated as of November 2022.
However, the report stated there had been “over-enthusiastic presentation of progress”.
In September 2022, the Cabinet Office reported: “The number of senior UK civil servants now based in Glasgow has grown by 1,400% under the scheme, with 30 senior officials now permanently located in the city.”
MPs stated using this share determine was mathematically appropriate but “hyperbolic” and “likely to mislead”.
The report stated: “Given the total is 30 posts, the rise of 1,400% must describe an increase merely of 28 posts, from an original two posts.
“The use of this figure suggests a wish to dress up the progress that has been achieved as something more grandiose.”
It later added: “In some of its communications [the Cabinet Office] is adopting a boosterish approach to reporting progress, which is likely to give an exaggerated picture of its achievements.”
The report additionally highlighted considerations over an absence of methodology guiding selections on the place civil service posts ought to moved to and from.
It added observers had raised questions over whether or not selections have been “excessively driven by personal or political calculations, poorly co-ordinated across government, or taken without due consideration of local impacts”.
The committee added a choice by the Treasury to open an financial campus in Darlington “has been linked with the close proximity of the town to then chancellor Rishi Sunak’s constituency and with the suggestion that Darlington is a key ‘red wall’ seat”.
Conservative committee chairman William Wragg stated: “The lack of consistency in relation to relocating civil service jobs reveals a vagueness at the heart of a key plank of the Government’s ‘levelling up’ agenda.
“The Cabinet Office has failed to provide a clear account of why certain functions are located where they are, and how relocation and regional hubs will benefit local communities across the country, if at all.”
“The Government’s latest plans have involved closing long-established regional offices, which can have hard-hitting impacts on local communities.
“This flies in the face of the Government’s ‘levelling up’ agenda. We need greater transparency and accountability of what seems to be a haphazard approach to reforming the Government’s estates and its workforce.”
A Cabinet Office spokesperson stated: “The Places for Growth programme is helping level up the country by moving over 12,000 roles out of Greater London in its first three years – with new locations in Darlington, Bristol and Glasgow.
“Extensive planning and analysis goes into decisions on new locations, including assessment of value for money, skills and local transport networks.
“New hubs are expected to deliver millions of pounds of economic benefits for local areas through increased footfall and spending from staff. Moving civil servants will always encounter opposition but we are determined to deliver.”
Garry Graham, normal secretary of the Prospect union, welcomed the report’s name for better proof to exhibit what advantages come up from shifting civil service work out of London.
He added: “The Government must stop chasing headlines by announcing arbitrary figures for headcount reductions and relocations, and instead develop a long-term strategy that has the confidence of staff and local communities.”