Experts to Tackle Public Service Inefficiencies

UK Gov

Wasteful duplication in government to be rooted out through new sweeping reviews.

  • Healthcare, homelessness and youth provision to go under microscope.
  • Processes that that duplicate work and spending to be reformed by Chief Secretary to the Treasury.
  • Reforms to build on billions of pounds of efficiencies and savings already found.

Wasteful duplication in government will be rooted out under a new programme of sweeping reviews into how services are funded.

Reviews, drawing in expertise from across the public and private sector, will be launched into four key areas - bringing healthcare out of hospitals, homelessness, the provision of youth services and the management and maintenance of public sector assets.

The reviews will also draw in expertise from across the public and private sector. Out-of-classroom youth provision, which clocks in at a bill of over £1 billion a year, for the government - will be reviewed to make a fragmented system spread across multiple departments and local government for each young person more efficient and effective.

Chief Secretary to the Treasury James Murray said:

These reviews will scrutinise government programmes to ensure they improve people's lives while rooting out wasteful spend from the public sector. We have a duty to taxpayers to make sure every pound of their money works as hard in government as the people who earn it.

Similarly, work will investigate how departments take a more preventive approach to tackling homelessness - with over three quarters of government expenditure on homelessness going to temporary accommodation. People sleeping rough can go on to use public services more than the average individual, at a cost of around £14,000 per person. Building on the cross-government work already ongoing, the review will identify how these public services such as the NHS can work better together to cut inefficient spending.

As healthcare has become increasingly centred around hospitals, community, primary care, mental health, social care and local services have been left working in silos - driving inefficiency and making the system harder for patients to navigate. The healthcare review will highlight these challenges and establish better how the government can deliver the shift of healthcare back to communities in a sustainable way across the NHS.

The last Spending Review increased long-term investment in public sector assets - delivering at least £10 billion a year for health, education and justice infrastructure by 2034‑35 and £24 billion between 2026‑27 and 2029‑30 to maintain and improve motorways and local roads.

The maintenance review will build on these long-term settlements, ensuring that departments and Ministers have the information they need to make effective investment decisions at future Spending Reviews.

This is a new way of working between departments and the Treasury. Previously, departments have worked on their own to find the best solutions and spending plans to issues they face, with this new approach breaking down government silos and joining up work to find the best cost-effect solutions for the public.

The Chief Secretary to the Treasury will lead the reviews, working with relevant Secretaries of State and Ministers as they identify wasteful spending in their departments and make recommendations to improve value for money in these areas. These recommendations will inform the next Spending Review, which will take place in 2027.

The Government has already made demonstrable progress in saving the taxpayer money. At last year's Spending Review, plans were published that will deliver nearly £14 billion of technical efficiencies by 2028-29 for the taxpayer. At last year's Budget, the government then announced a further £2.8 billion of efficiencies and savings in 2028-29, which will rise to £4.9 billion in 2030-31.

/Public Release. This material from the originating organization/author(s) might be of the point-in-time nature, and edited for clarity, style and length. Mirage.News does not take institutional positions or sides, and all views, positions, and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the author(s).View in full here.