We never seem to be very far away from a promised procurement shake up in central government, and no sooner is one initiative announced than it seems another is upon us. Against that busy background, however, recent weeks have seen an unusually high level of activity.
Little of the recent news could be called particularly good for construction; some of it might not be very good for procurement either. The government’s commitment to getting construction costs down – 20% seems to be the figure that would currently make them happy – has been widely reported. It certainly does seem agreed that the UK is a more expensive place to build, so the government and other construction clients is well within its right to ask why. Task Forces have been set up under the auspices of the Cabinet Office to come up with some answers and solutions.
The Major Projects Authority (MPA), off spring of the Cabinet Office and the Treasury, was set up about a year ago to scrutinise all major government spending on projects, ie those that require Treasury approval, and to direct their effective management. It was given an ‘enforceable mandate’ from the Prime Minister to do so. An annual report on the progress of major projects was promised for December last year but has now been promised for publication in summer this year.
A speech by MPA head David Pitchford at the launch of a new initiative to train civil servants to take over some of the project management role currently undertaken by consultants (see News) paints a less than rosy picture. Fewer than half of the government’s major projects – not all them construction projects – are being delivered on time (just like the MPA’s annual report) and to budget.
Consultants were walking away with the money and the knowledge, leaving the government with neither, Mr Pitchford was reported as saying. One reason why private sector consultants have been in such heavy demand has undoubtedly been the lack of project management and procurement skills generally in the civil service. The shortcomings have been highlighted in several reports.
Civil servants have been made redundant in droves recently, so there is a smaller pool of them to choose from. Taking 150 senior civil servants out of their day jobs will leave a substantial hole behind, always assuming that project management is a role that enough of them see themselves filling. The high turnover of civil servants observed by construction industry professionals on projects that are not going well at least suggests there may not be as much natural aptitude for the task as the government imagines.
What will these 150 senior civil service project managers do when there is no project under way for them to be involved with? Is public sector construction demand really going to be smooth enough to ensure there is no sizeable downtime? Consultants might look expensive in so far as a lot is spent on them, but they might come to look like a bargain.
Nick Barrett
Editor