The State of the Estate 2010

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Friday 13th May 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

I have today laid before Parliament, pursuant to section 86 of the Climate Change Act 2008 (as amended), “The State of the Estate in 2010”. This report provides an assessment of the efficiency and sustainability of the Government’s civil estate in 2010. It provides early insights into the progress Government are making since introducing the national property controls and moratorium on leaseholds. In the report I set out the future direction for using the Government estate more efficiently, including our commitment to meeting the 10% reduction in carbon emissions target. The report is published on an annual basis.

Cabinet Office

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Thursday 5th May 2011 Ministerial Corrections

[Jon Trickett]

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office pursuant to the answer of 21 March 2011, Official Report, column 838W, if he will publish the departmental estimates that were collated to arrive at the stated estimates of savings.

[Official Report, 1 April 2011, Vol. 526, c. 540-41W.]

Letter of correction from Mr Francis Maude:

An error has been identified in the written answer given to the hon. Member for Hemsworth (Jon Trickett) on 1 April 2011. The HO and total figures were incorrect.

The full answer given was as follows:

[Mr Maude]

[holding answer 31 March 2011]: On 16 March 2011, I announced that we estimate cumulative administrative savings of £2.6 billion will flow from public bodies over the spending review period.

The departmental estimates that were collated to arrive at that figure are:

[Mr Maude]

[holding answer 31 March 2011]: On 16 March 2011, I announced that we estimate cumulative administrative savings of £2.6 billion will flow from public bodies over the spending review period.

The departmental estimates that were collated to arrive at that figure are:

Oral Answers to Questions

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Wednesday 27th April 2011 Commons Chamber

[Amber Rudd (Hastings and Rye) (Con)]

8. What steps he is taking to increase access to Government contracts for small and medium-sized enterprises.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

On 11 February, the Prime Minister and I announced a package of measures, including launching our Contracts Finder website, eliminating burdensome and unnecessary pre-qualification requirements from the procurement process, and introducing new ways to allow small and medium-sized enterprises to challenge contract procedures when they operate in a way that makes life difficult for them. In addition, from the end of April, all Departments will be required to publish a set of specific, targeted actions to increase their business with SMEs.

[Robert Halfon]

Will the Minister set out what steps he is taking to increase access to public contracts for smaller, grass-roots charities as well? Does he agree that for the big society to work properly, we need to build the little society too?

[Mr Maude]

My hon. Friend makes the point very well. All the measures that we are taking to enable small and medium-sized businesses to participate more fully in Government contracts will, of course, apply to the voluntary and charitable sector as well. Indeed, it is estimated that 35% to 40% of the value of the contracts recently awarded under the Department for Work and Pensions Work programme will go to organisations from the voluntary and charitable sector. We believe that that will be worth in excess of £100 million a year.

[Julian Smith]

Will the Minister take this opportunity to name and shame those Government Departments that are doing well in opening up to small businesses and those that are currently doing less well?

[Mr Maude]

I certainly do not want to shame the ones that are doing well. We have found a number of examples of procurement processes that are not meeting the new requirements. For example, Durham police recently issued an invitation to tender for a £50,000 leadership training contract. The pre-qualification questionnaire alone was 38 pages long and contained a request for 163 separate items of information plus a security vetting form. That is unacceptable, because it causes many smaller businesses to lose the will to live, and they simply do not apply.

[Mark Pawsey]

I am the former owner of a small business supplying products to the public sector. When applying to be added to a new tender list, I was often frustrated by the amount of red tape required. Will the Minister confirm that in future fewer company policies and statements will need to be provided to participate in the tendering process?

[Mr Maude]

We want to strip away all that nonsense. Under the last Government, there were 6,000 pages of guidance for some kinds of procurements. It is not surprising that smaller businesses just did not bother to apply; they knew that they were going to be excluded. There were turnover requirements and requirements for a track record of doing exactly that kind of work. The truth is that that is very bad for small businesses and we want to make things much better.

[Amber Rudd]

During a recent meeting, small and medium-sized enterprises in Hastings raised with me the difficulties not just of the paperwork, but of getting the capital requirements in this climate for procurement contracts with the Government. Will the Minister reassure us that that aspect will also be considered, as we try to make it easier for small and medium-sized enterprises to engage with the Government?

[Mr Maude]

My hon. Friend makes a good point. We are concerned that the working capital requirements should be proportionate and sensible and that the turnover requirements should be proportionate to the needs of the contract. All ridiculous requirements such as those that existed under the old regime—for example, always requiring three years of audited accounts, which automatically excluded huge numbers of new and innovative businesses—will be swept away.

[Mr Denis MacShane (Rotherham) (Lab)]

Does the Minister accept the macro-problem? In south Yorkshire, a large number of private sector enterprises depend in whole or in part on public sector contracts. So much demand is being taken out of the economy, because of the deficit reduction plans, that such businesses face serious challenges. Does he accept that small enterprises face a real problem because of his Government’s macro-economic policy?

[Mr Maude]

I acknowledge that there is a problem—and it is one caused by the Government of whom the right hon. Gentleman was a member and supported. They left Britain with the biggest budget deficit in the developed world. I am waiting for the right hon. Gentleman to apologise for that; that would be timely.

[Tessa Jowell (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)]

In looking at an increased role for small and medium-sized businesses, will the Minister let the House know when his Department will publish the public services reform White Paper? It was commissioned last October to be published early in the new year. January became February, and the Prime Minister said that it was only two weeks away. Two weeks have become more than two months and there is still no sign of the White Paper. Is that the Government’s biggest pause, or have they just given up on public services?

[Mr Maude]

I am thrilled that the right hon. Lady is waiting for the document with such obvious excitement, and I can assure her that it will be well worth waiting for. This Government are committed to breaking up the old public sector monopolies and providing diversity, particularly with the growth of public service mutuals. The document will be published later this summer, and I can promise her that she will be delighted with it.

[Lindsay Roy (Glenrothes) (Lab)]

2. Whether private sector organisations will be able to make applications to the big society bank.

--- Later in debate ---

[Andrew Selous (South West Bedfordshire) (Con)]

10. What recent progress his Department has made on establishing public sector mutuals.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

In August last year, we launched a pathfinder programme of 21 groups of public sector workers setting up mutuals with the help of mentors. In addition, millions of public sector employees will be given rights to provide public services as mutuals, such as those recently announced in the national health service. That will free up public sector workers to innovate and provide better and more efficient services. We have committed to funding a £10 million support programme to help such new organisations get off the ground. [Interruption.]

[Andrew Selous]

Given the evidence that productivity and efficiency increase dramatically when staff are given a role in shaping services, is not the scaremongering about the proposals on mutuals unhelpful to users, taxpayers and the staff concerned?

[Mr Maude]

Anyone who visits the pathfinder mutuals, talks to the staff—now co-owners—of those organisations and sees the excitement with which they are pursuing their new vocation will give up on the scaremongering. This is a profoundly important movement that should command support from throughout the House.

[Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con)]

T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

I have overall responsibility for the work of the Cabinet Office, while the Deputy Prime Minister has specific responsibility for the Government’s programme of political and constitutional reform.

[Mr Bone]

Last week on the doorstep in Wellingborough, the hot issue was the responsibility of the Cabinet Office for implementing constitutional reform. Why is it that, under the alternative vote, British National party votes and Socialist Workers party votes in my constituency would be counted twice, but Tory votes would be counted only once?

[Mr Maude]

My hon. Friend makes a powerful point. That is no doubt why, I gather, rather more than half of Labour MPs now support first past the post.

[Teresa Pearce (Erith and Thamesmead) (Lab)]

T3. Staff at My Civil Service Pension are concerned that plans to turn the organisation into a mutual are a step towards privatisation. The Minister said in a meeting with union representatives in March that he would not act without the broad consent of the work force. Will he tell us how he has consulted those staff and whether he yet has that consent?

[Mr Maude]

We are moving down the path of freeing up My Civil Service Pension so that it can administer in the most efficient way civil service pensions to the 1.5 million members who are dependent on them. We are exploring different ways in which that might be configured, but crucially, employees will have a meaningful stake in that entity going forward.

[Julian Smith (Skipton and Ripon) (Con)]

T2. Fifty business leaders have got together to offer free mentoring advice to small and new business start-ups in my constituency. Will the big society Minister meet me to see how we can roll out that initiative beyond north Yorkshire?

--- Later in debate ---

[John Mann (Bassetlaw) (Lab)]

T5. Which Cabinet Office conferencing, translation and interpreting services have not been put out to tender for small businesses to win, and why not?

[Mr Maude]

I have not the slightest idea, but I shall find out.

[Miss Anne McIntosh (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)]

T4. When can the House expect the Public Bodies Bill? What will be in the Bill, and can we revert to the normal practice, whereby such controversial Bills begin in this House and not in the other place?

--- Later in debate ---

[John Woodcock (Barrow and Furness) (Lab /Co-op)]

T10. Why is the public sector mutual fund late in going out to tender, and when will it be ready to accept bids?

[Mr Maude]

We will announce details in due course. It would have been easy to go ahead and just flash money around, but there is not much money thanks to the legacy of the Government whom the hon. Gentleman supported. We need to ensure that the money is husbanded and spent wisely, for example by providing advice for groups of public sector workers, of whom there are very many who want to form mutuals, and by ensuring that the advice is made available to as many as possible.

[Sir Alan Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed) (LD)]

In his discussions about public sector contracts for small business, will my right hon. Friend talk to the Ministry of Defence about its habit of bundling together contracts for multiple services, which means that an expert calibration firm in my constituency cannot offer the specialised service unless it also offers paperclips and toilet rolls?

[Mr Maude]

My right hon. Friend makes a good point, and I will take it up. It is exactly how contracts are bundled up and procurements are undertaken that has squeezed out so many really effective small businesses from the Government market. That is exactly what we now want to change.

The Prime Minister was asked—

Members' and Peers' Correspondence

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Monday 28th March 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

I am today publishing a report on Departments’ and agencies’ performance on handling Members’ and peers’ correspondence during the calendar year 2010. Details are set out in the attached table. Correspondence statistics for 2009 can be found on 16 March 2010, Official Report, 47-50WS.

Departmental figures are based on substantive replies unless otherwise indicated.

The footnotes to the table provide general background information on how the figures have been compiled.

Election and Referendum Guidance

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Thursday 24th March 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

Guidance has today been issued to civil servants in UK Departments on the principles which they should observe in relation to the conduct of Government business in the run up to the forthcoming elections to the Northern Ireland Assembly, the Scottish Parliament and the National Assembly for Wales, to local authorities in England and Northern Ireland, and the voting systems referendum.

The guidance sets out the principles on the need to maintain the political impartiality of the civil service, and the need to ensure that public resources are not used for party political purposes, and sets out the sensitive periods when the guidance comes into force.

Copies of the guidance have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses and on the Cabinet Office website at

http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/resource-library/election-guidance.

Public Bodies Reform Programme

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Wednesday 16th March 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

The coalition Government are committed to reducing the number and cost of quangos and increasing accountability by transferring the responsibility for key decisions of public policy back to Ministers.

On 14 October 2010, I placed in the Libraries of both Houses a list of proposed reforms to take forward this commitment. The Public Bodies Bill has since been introduced to provide the legislative basis for reform. I have also placed in the Libraries an updated list of proposed reforms this morning.

Committees of both Houses have shown significant interest in the Government’s review. This statement accompanies our response to a report of the Public Administration Select Committee, “Smaller Government: Shrinking the Quango State”.

The Government welcome this opportunity to restate the aims and intentions of our reform programme for public bodies, and to correct some misunderstandings and inaccuracies apparent in that report.

With these reforms, we will increase accountability by putting into practice our clear presumption that functions carried out by the state should be accountable through democratically elected structures. We will ensure clear chains of democratic accountability through to Ministers, by transferring functions into a Department, or by creating a new executive agency. We will also increase accountability to local decision makers and will also support our big society, transferring functions from public bodies to local government, voluntary or charitable bodies or social enterprises.

A secondary, but important, purpose is to remove duplication and waste, save taxpayers’ money and to streamline a chaotic and confusing public bodies landscape.

PASC has criticised the Government for being unable to identify exact cost savings. We were always clear that savings would flow from this programme of rationalisation and reform. I can now announce that we estimate that cumulative administrative savings of £2.6 billion will flow from public bodies over the spending review period. When reductions in programme and capital spend are taken into account, we estimate that total spending through public bodies will be reduced by at least £11 billion per year by 2014-15, a cumulative amount of £30 billion over the spending review period. This does not include spending simply transferred elsewhere.

At the time of the October announcement, I indicated a number of reviews were still in progress, with bodies listed as “under consideration”. I publish with this statement an updated list of reform proposals, giving more certainty to the staff in those public bodies as to how the Government’s review programme will affect them.

Implementation is being taken forward by Departments, with the Cabinet Office operating as a source of support and guidance. I publish two key Cabinet Office documents today: a checklist of issues Departments need to consider in implementing public bodies reform; and a set of eight key requirements that must be followed in all cases (these requirements are annexed to the Government’s response to PASC).

The Government’s commitment to reform of public bodies does not end with the implementation of this first stage of reform proposals. I also publish today a summary of a new robust system of triennial reviews and underline our determination to take decisive action where future reviews highlight inefficiency and waste. The Government intend that the powers in the Public Bodies Bill will provide a proportionate mechanism to implement the conclusions of subsequent reviews.

Reducing the number and cost of public bodies is a coalition priority. It is important that we make progress and I make no excuse for the speed at which we have sought to realise our commitment. There is momentum and cross-party support for a radical programme of reform. We have already brought forward proposals on an unprecedented scale and with the Public Bodies Bill and our implementation plans we take those proposals to fruition. With our future process of review and reform, we will continue to ensure accountability in public life and identify and drive out inefficiency, duplication and waste.

Oral Answers to Questions

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd March 2011 Commons Chamber

[Tom Blenkinsop (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)]

2. What steps he plans to take to ensure that the big society bank has a social mission as part of its statutory remit.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

In our social investment strategy, announced on 14 February, we set out that the big society bank will be an independent institution with a locked-in social mission and initial capital provided by the banks. Sir Ronald Cohen and Nick O’Donohoe are working with us and the banks to put forward a proposal on how best and most speedily to achieve that.

[Tom Blenkinsop]

As how the big society bank will be set up and the terms on which it will receive capital from UK banks are still unclear, will the Minister explain how he will guarantee the bank’s social mission and ensure that it does not become like other mainstream lenders?

[Mr Maude]

As I said, the social remit will be absolutely built into its mission; it is a crucial part of it, so it will be locked in. I have to say that criticism comes poorly from Labour Members who have talked about creating a social investment bank for many years. Frankly, on taking office last May, I expected to find well-prepared plans, but when I opened the file, I found it pretty much empty.

[Simon Hughes (Bermondsey and Old Southwark) (LD)]

The Minister will know that I welcome the bank. What priorities will it have to fund projects associated with, and supporting, young people?

[Mr Maude]

That will be one of the bank’s priorities. The legislation allowing the money from dormant bank and building society accounts to be put into a social investment bank provides a priority for youth projects. As I say, this will be a serious priority. The bank will be able to provide wholesale funds into the already growing social investment market, for which there is a huge demand. We want to see much more money—including, over time, mainstream finance from the mainstream banks—being made available for this market.

[Tessa Jowell (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)]

We welcome the progress the Government have made in setting up the big society bank, and we note that it will be launched with £300 million-worth of capital at the end of this year. However, community projects also rely on revenue funding to support capital investment and according to estimates from the Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations, the total loss of revenue faced by civil society organisations will be at least £1.14 billion in the next financial year, rising to £3.1 billion a year by 2014-15. Does the Minister accept these figures and, if not, will he undertake to provide the Government’s own estimates of the revenue losses faced by community organisations over that period?

[Mr Maude]

The social investment bank planned by the last Government would have received a meagre £75 million of investment at best, and probably a great deal less than that.

I do not know whether the right hon. Lady noted what my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government told the conference of the National Council for Voluntary Organisations yesterday. He said that the Government had “reasonable expectations” that local authorities would not impose greater cuts in their funding for community, social and voluntary organisations than they imposed on their in-house services, and that if authorities did not follow those “reasonable expectations”, he would contemplate making them statutory.

The fact is that we face the biggest budget deficit in the developed world. As a result of the legacy of the Government of whom the right hon. Lady was a prominent member, we are spending £4 for every £3 in revenue, and we cannot carry on like that. The necessity—and it is a necessity—to eradicate the structural deficit is something for which the right hon. Lady should bear her full share of responsibility.

[John Pugh (Southport) (LD)]

3. What assessment his Department has made of the potential efficiency savings from the use of teleconferencing.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

Teleconferencing and video conferencing are a key part of our strategy to minimise travel in the civil service. Officials have been encouraged, indeed instructed, to use alternatives. Telephone calls can be quite helpful in that regard, when possible. So far, Departments have saved £50 million in the current financial year by avoiding travel, but by the better buying of travel services we have saved an additional £50 million. We are also reducing the cost of teleconferencing itself. We have opened up fresh discussions with major suppliers, and as a result of the Crown renegotiations that I have been overseeing, one of our suppliers has already offered a significant reduction in its audio conferencing tariffs.

[John Pugh]

I thank the Minister for that full answer, but will he make it a little fuller by telling me which Departments make good use of teleconferences and which do not, and why?

[Mr Maude]

That is a very good question, to which I do not have an immediate answer. I am prompted by the hon. Gentleman’s interest to look into the matter, and I will get back to him with some answers.

[Mr Tom Watson (West Bromwich East) (Lab)]

Teleconferencing provides a key opportunity for digital policy. The head of that policy in the Minister’s Department was appointed without a fair and open competition, as a former party staffer. That was one of 30 appointments revealed by freedom of information releases this week. Can the Minister tell me who those 30 people are and what they do?

[Mr Maude]

Of course I understand why the hon. Gentleman is so outraged by the idea of people with party affiliations fulfilling a public service vocation, because of course none of that ever happened under his party’s Government—a Government who, with the hon. Gentleman as one of the principal operators, distinguished themselves by their approach to cronyism.

I can tell the hon. Gentleman that anyone who has been appointed to a civil service role has passed all the appropriate tests, which, as he will know from his experience as a Minister in my Department, are extremely rigorous.

[Peter Aldous (Waveney) (Con)]

4. What progress his Department has made in establishing a big society bank.

[Miss Anne McIntosh (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)]

5. What recent representations he has received on the big society bank; and if he will make a statement.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

Sir Ronald Cohen and Nick O’Donohoe are working with us and with the banks to develop a proposal for the big society bank. As I have said, it will initially be capitalised by an investment from the mainstream banks. We are currently seeking to secure state aid approvals from the European Commission so that money from dormant bank and building society accounts can be directed towards the big society bank. Nothing along those lines had been done when the Government took office. In the meantime, we are working with the Big Lottery Fund to ensure that interim arrangements are in place by April, so that we can make early investments as soon as the first round of dormant bank account money becomes available in the summer.

[Peter Aldous]

Youth clubs such as the Metro, Boston Lodge and Colville House play an important role in my constituency. What guidance and financial assistance will be given to them, and to those operating new voluntary sector schemes whose aim is to take over the running of other local services such as crossing patrols and libraries, and when will that guidance and assistance be available?

[Mr Maude]

As my hon. Friend will know, a key part of our approach to public service reform will be encouraging voluntary and social enterprises to bid for the delivery of public services. They are being given a massive opportunity to develop different revenue streams and deliver public services in a responsive and agile way. The big society bank will deliver extra wholesale funding to the social investment market for start-up and development capital for such organisations. In the meantime, for some organisations the transition fund will provide bridging finance until those revenue streams become available.

[Miss McIntosh]

My question was about representations received, because there is a lot of interest in the big society bank in Thirsk, Malton and Filey, but there is also concern that if match funding is required, it will trigger the 2.5% referendum call on local government spending under the Localism Bill. Will this issue be addressed?

[Mr Maude]

I will look into that. The big society bank will provide private investment to bulk up the important social investment market. We have had numerous representations on this matter, most of them saying, “Please get on with it because we were very disappointed about waiting for so long for the last Government to do anything at all.”

[Chris Ruane (Vale of Clwyd) (Lab)]

Will the big society bank give grants as well as loans, and will the loans be set at commercial or preferential rates?

[Mr Maude]

The big society bank will not make grants. It is a bank, so it will make loans and provide investment capital for this important and growing sector. One of the problems in the social investment market has been that Futurebuilders was able to give both grants and loans, which was very distorting for the large and growing number of intermediaries in that market. The bank should be an investment organisation, not a giver of grants.

[Mark Durkan (Foyle) (SDLP)]

What steps have been taken to ensure that the big society bank will be relevant and accessible in all regions? Also, is it being impressed upon the banks that the coming arrival of the big society bank will not obviate their duty to show consideration and support for the third sector in the current challenging funding environment?

[Mr Maude]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that relevant question. The introduction of the big society bank certainly does not obviate the broader need to support voluntary and social enterprises, in the interests of local residents. The bank’s remit will be UK-wide. The money put in by the banks will be for UK purposes, but the money coming into the big society bank in due course from dormant bank accounts will be for England only, unless the devolved Administrations decide to put their share of that money into the big society bank, which I hope they will be encouraged to do.

[Rosie Cooper (West Lancashire) (Lab)]

6. What estimate he has made of the likely change in the number of jobs in the voluntary sector in the next three years.

--- Later in debate ---

[Anas Sarwar (Glasgow Central) (Lab)]

8. What assessment he has made of the progress of the work of the big society ministerial group.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

The informal ministerial group on the big society and decentralisation supports progress across government on cross-cutting issues, such as the role of the voluntary community and social enterprise sector in public service delivery, the progress made in vanguard areas and the compact between the voluntary sector and the state.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. The House must come to order. This is very unfair on the Minister. He is offering the House an informative answer and it must be heard.

[Anas Sarwar]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I also thank the Minister for his answer. Given that opinion polls show that the majority of the British people have not even heard of the big society and that the majority of those who have think it is just a cover-up for the cuts, does the Minister believe that the work of the ministerial group has been a resounding success? Does he not believe that Ministers’ time would be better spent doing credible work in their own Departments?

[Mr Maude]

I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman does not think that building a bigger, stronger and more cohesive society is worth while, particularly given that the role of the state is having to retrench severely as a result of the financial incontinence of the previous Government of the party that he supports. I am sorry to have to remind him that when the coalition Government took office his Government were spending £4 for every £3 in revenue and had the biggest budget deficit in the developed world. So less money is available and building a bigger, stronger society, which I would have thought he would support, is a very worthwhile exercise for not only the whole Government, but the whole of Parliament.

[Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con)]

Will the ministerial group examine the role of the big society bank to see whether it can be run on national credit union lines, so that it can link up with local credit unions and ensure that the money cascades down to community groups at the grass-roots level?

[Mr Maude]

The social investment market has been growing in recent years but it needs additional wholesale funds, both from the big society bank and from freeing up the guidelines on investment by trustees of big philanthropic foundations. That will grow the social investment market significantly, and the credit union movement, which is extraordinarily important and has a very important social mission, can be an important partner in that progress.

[Alison McGovern (Wirral South) (Lab)]

Will the Minister or the “Secretary of State for the big society” have a quiet word with Wirral borough council, which has closed important care and respite homes too quickly in order to let the non-government sector fill the gap? That is giving the big society a bad name.

[Mr Maude]

I refer the hon. Lady to the remarks made by the Communities Secretary yesterday. We do believe in localism; we believe in local authorities being accountable, not to Whitehall, but to their own local residents. Each local authority has to justify its decisions but, as my right hon. Friend said yesterday, we have expectations that local authorities will not impose greater cuts on their funding for voluntary organisations than they do on their own costs. We would expect them to have regard to that.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. The House must come to order. We want to hear Joseph Johnson.

[Joseph Johnson (Orpington) (Con)]

10. What steps he is taking to reduce the risk of fraud in public sector procurement.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

The National Fraud Authority estimates that £21 billion is lost to fraud in the public sector each year, on top of which there is a so far unquantified loss from error and from uncollected debt. It is estimated that £2.4 billion of that £21 billion is lost to procurement fraud, and that is unacceptable. The Prime Minister has asked me to chair a counter-fraud taskforce comprising members from government and private sector experts to tackle the issue. We are overseeing a series of pilots, including one on procurement, to drive forward ways to tackle public sector fraud, and we will report our findings in due course.

[Joseph Johnson]

I thank the Minister for that answer. That figure of £21 billion is truly shocking. Will the Minister update the House on progress towards developing a more robust methodology for quantifying how much taxpayers’ money is being wasted in this way?

[Mr Maude]

It is actually difficult to know exactly how much is being lost. The numbers are increasing each year, but that is largely because there is a better handle on the data. The quality of much Government data is lamentably poor and it is particularly difficult to obtain accurate figures on some procurement fraud, such as collusion or bid rigging. However, in one of the taskforce pilots, the Department for Transport is using data analytics to detect overpayments from the Department’s accounts payable systems. A similar exercise undertaken by the Home Office detected and recovered no less than £4 million in overpayments as a result of fraud or error.

[Mr Speaker]

I am obliged to the Minister.

Social Investment Strategy

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Monday 14th February 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

My hon. Friend the Minister responsible for civil society, the Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, the hon. Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (Mr Hurd) and I are today publishing a strategy for social investment, “Growing the Social Investment Market”, which gives more detail on the role of the big society bank, alongside other measures to build the market. I am placing copies in the Libraries of both Houses and making it available on the Cabinet Office website.

Social entrepreneurs, and the social ventures they lead, bring innovative solutions to some of our most intractable social problems, by combining commitment to a clear social mission with financially sustainable business models. They are crucial to building a bigger, stronger society, as well as contributing to economic growth and employment. However, social entrepreneurs are often held back by a lack of access to investment finance, which means they find it difficult to get started, to expand their ventures and to achieve their full potential. This is particularly the case now that public spending is constrained and many organisations that may have previously relied on some grant funding to survive are having to cope with the difficult transition to a new financing landscape.

The Government therefore want to accelerate the development of the emerging social investment market, to increase the supply of capital available to social ventures. Our vision is for a market in which investors—from individual citizens to large institutions and charitable trusts and foundations—can choose to “invest for good” by putting their money into organisations that create positive social impact and a financial return. In the long term we want this to become the norm: a third pillar of funding alongside traditional giving and public service income.

The big society bank will play a crucial part in catalysing the development of this market, and some of its functions will be in place in April 2011. And we will now work with leading social investment experts to develop a proposal for the establishment of the big society bank as an independent private sector organisation, with its social mission “locked-in”. The bank will act as a wholesaler to build the market and leverage in new finance. It will operate in a transparent way, publishing annual accounts including details of the financial and social impact of its investments, and it will be financially self-sufficient—able, in time, to cover its operating costs and make investments in line with its core mission. The bank will also act as a champion for the social investment market, offering advice and assistance, and acting as a vital portal to connect social ventures with sources of investment.

Alongside establishing the big society bank, action being taken by Government—to open up public services to a wider range of providers; to empower communities to purchase and run local assets; to review the effectiveness of the current fiscal, regulatory and legal framework for social investment; and to provide financial and other support for social ventures to build their business capability—will help create the right conditions for the market to thrive and grow.

Government and the big society bank cannot achieve this alone. So the strategy also calls on others to play their part. Social ventures and other civil society organisations will need to be willing to explore new forms of financing, and prove that they have financially sustainable business models. Existing specialist intermediaries will have a critical role in developing their product ranges and support and will need to compete with new intermediaries entering the market. Charitable trusts and foundations are in a good position to free up a portion of their investment and endowment assets, which account for nearly £95 billion, for social investment. We look to mainstream financial institutions to dedicate resources to create new products, to build expertise and to leverage their distribution networks. And ultimately, we want individual citizens to start to see social investment as a core savings proposition.

Taken together this framework for action and the establishment of the big society bank will enable the great work being carried out by the innovative, committed people and organisations across the UK to have a major impact in building a better, stronger society.

Departmental Expenditure Limit (2010-11)

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Monday 14th February 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

Subject to parliamentary approval of the spring supplementary estimate 2010-11, the Cabinet Office total departmental expenditure limit (DEL) will be increased by £17,630,000 from £559,087,000 to £576,717,000.

The impact on resources and capital is set out in the following table:

UK Statistics Authority: Departmental Expenditure Limit (2010-11)

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Monday 14th February 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

Subject to parliamentary approval of any necessary supplementary estimate, the UK Statistics Authority’s total departmental expenditure limit (DEL) will be increased by £700,000 from £319,533,000 to £320,233,000, and the programme budget will be increased by £700,000¹.

Within the DEL change, the impact on resources and capital is as set out in the following table: