Author: admin

  • HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Public Services Reform: Making a real difference – More cross departmental studies in 2000 Spending Review [November 1999]

    HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Public Services Reform: Making a real difference – More cross departmental studies in 2000 Spending Review [November 1999]

    The press release issued by HM Treasury on 24 November 1999.

    The Government has decided to increase from 6 to 13 the number of cross Departmental spending studies in the forthcoming 2000 Spending Review, the Chief Secretary Andrew Smith announced today. This follows clear evidence that cross Departmental work is making a real difference, allowing service providers to find new and better ways of responding to the needs of local people.

    Andrew Smith commented:

    “We want to see a step change in the quality of public services. We have shown our commitment already with extra resources for key areas like Health and Education, but we want to go further in ensuring that policies and services are designed and delivered in a more integrated, flexible and customer-centred way. The cross Departmental work in the original Comprehensive Spending Review has proved to be a success. We want to build on this in next year’s Review to ensure a more coherent approach to the delivery of services . I am grateful to Departments for the innovative and practical way they have responded to this initiative.”

    The proposed new cross Departmental studies will cover:

    • rural and countryside programmes
    • young people at risk
    • crime reduction
    • support for older people
    • drugs
    • Government intervention in deprived areas
    • science and research
    • Welfare to Work and ONE
    • the criminal justice system
    • Sure Start and services for the under 5s
    • conflict prevention
    • nuclear safety in the former Soviet Union
    • Local Government finance

    The Government is determined to ensure that public spending is directed to delivering high quality public services. This means:

    • raising the standards of front line service delivery
      focussing on outcomes – what counts is what works
    • accountability for performance
    • effective teamwork to achieve shared goals
  • HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Top experts draw up five point action plan to tackle variations in performance across the public sector [November 1999]

    HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Top experts draw up five point action plan to tackle variations in performance across the public sector [November 1999]

    The press release issued by HM Treasury on 24 November 1999.

    A five point action plan to tackle variations in performance throughout the public sector and raise standards to the levels of the best was drawn up by 20 top experts at a meeting in Downing Street today, hosted by the Chief Secretary Andrew Smith, and attended by the Prime Minister Tony Blair.

    Experts from a wide range of services, including the Cancer Tsar Prof Mike Richards and Sir Peter Davis from the New Deal Task Force, as well as top businessmen Mike Harris from Egg and Michael Wemms from Tescos agreed a five point plan that will mean:

    • targets to raise performance within the public services to the levels of the best will be set in the 2000 Spending Review
    • comparisons within services, as well as with other public services, the private sector and other countries, will be encouraged
    • league tables will be increasingly used to bring home the potential that there is to improve performance, applying best practice on measurement and design
    • techniques for raising performance, such as Beacon Schemes and the Excellence Model, will be promoted
    • the Government will involve staff, especially those at the front line, through local seminars and other means, to communicate its vision and find out what works

    Commenting today Andrew Smith said:

    ” We are stepping up our drive for modernisation in key public services so they provide high quality services for everyone throughout the country. Whilst visible improvements are already coming through from the extra investment we have put in progress is uneven and there are still too many unacceptable variations in performance across the public services. Shining the spotlight on these variations, finding innovative solutions and spreading good practice is intended to raise standards to the levels of the best so that everyone can benefit. We want to see the worst learning from the best. We want to tackle failure and reward success. I am grateful to all those attending this seminar today for their commitment to making this work.”

    The Government values the public services and those that work in them. There are already many examples of good practice and the publication of league tables in a number of areas, including Health, Education and the Criminal Justice System is already underway. However the public sector is a large organisation and it is important innovative ideas and solutions are spread throughout the sector so that everyone can learn what works best.

    Today’s seminar is an opportunity to look at what can be learned from the action taken so far, see what else can be done in the future and decide what further help the centre can give to identifying good practice and spread it in a way that encourages take up.

    Data from a variety of sources (Departments, public bodies, Audit Commission etc) shows some of the considerable variations that do occur:

    • the percentage of drugs prescribed generically varies from below 50% to over 70%. Lincolnshire is worst on 47% whereas Newcastle and
    • N Tyneside managed 72%
    • in further education students at Hackney Community College only achieve 33% of the qualifications they set out to achieve whereas in Newham they achieve 77%
    • in bin collection, 1996-97, the average authority missed 53 bins out of every 100,000 they were supposed to collect whereas Liverpool missed 6,244 and Newcastle 36
    • Dyfed-Powys police force detected 55% of crimes in 1997-98 whereas Gloucestershire detected under 20%. The average was 26%.
  • HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : The UK Economy “A Remarkable Performance” says IMF [November 1999]

    HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : The UK Economy “A Remarkable Performance” says IMF [November 1999]

    The press release issued by HM Treasury on 24 November 1999.

    “The performance of the UK economy in recent years has been remarkable” according to the latest assessment by experts from the International Monetary Fund.

    On the Government’s progress to delivering its central economic objective of high and stable levels of growth and employment, the IMF report that “growth has been high, unemployment has declined steadily to very low levels, and inflation has remained subdued”.

    The Fund conclude that “this strong performance is in good part owing to the improved policy framework which has fostered sound monetary and fiscal policies and significant structural reforms.”

    Commenting on the IMF’s statement, the Chancellor, Gordon Brown, said:

    “I welcome today’s assessment of the UK economy by the IMF. It clearly supports the Government’s new framework for economic policy, and our continued prudent and cautious approach to managing the public finances.”

    Other major points in the IMF’s report include:

    • “the new monetary policy framework is working well”;
    • the continued need for “a cautious approach” in managing the public finances, and the importance of avoiding the mistakes of the past, which led to gains being frittered away. They say “there is no case for relaxing fiscal policy”. In particular they “welcome the prudent approach espoused in the PBR”;
    • plaudits for the UK’s “enviable” record on transparency in policy-making;
    • praise for the Government’s policies to move people off welfare and into work, and to make work pay. They note “the Government’s welfare reforms, including the New Deals and the WFTC…hold great promise for combatting poverty and reducing the number of jobless households”;
    • commendation of the Government’s efforts to put the issue of debt relief for the poorest countries at the top of the international agenda, and for “their commitment to increasing UK overseas aid spending”.

    The IMF’s report comes shortly after the OECD, another major international organisation, also praised the Government’s management of the UK economy. In it’s Economic Outlook, published last week, the OECD issued projections for the UK economy which are closely similar to the Government’s PBR forecasts, and singled out for special mention the UK’s “markedly improved labour market performance as well as skilful management of monetary policy”

  • Andrew Smith – 1999 Speech to the Best Value Conference

    Andrew Smith – 1999 Speech to the Best Value Conference

    The speech made by Andrew Smith, the then Chief Secretary to the Treasury, on 22 November 1999.

    Thank you for coming to this conference today. Having been a councillor myself in Oxford for 11 years and my wife having been one for 12 years for the Blackbird Leys estate in Oxford where we live, I can tell you local government has loomed large in my life. I’ve seen it at its best and I’ve seen it at its not so good. I believe in it and I want to make it better.

    So today I want to outline to you why Best Value is a core element of this Government’s modernisation programme, why Best Value demonstrates our commitment to building a new relationship built on partnership between Central and local government.

    Britain’s public services are crucial to the fabric of our country. Time and again, people make clear just how highly they value services such as education, health care and public transport. Indeed our commitment to public services was a key reason why we were elected into office and we expect in the future to be judged on our programme for their reform.

    Modern, efficient public services lie at the very heart of a productive and fair society. That is why improving public sector productivity was central to the productivity strategy set out two weeks ago by Gordon Brown in the Pre-Budget Report.

    We believe in our public services and we believe in the people who deliver them. And precisely because we believe in them, we think there’s a real sense of urgency in making the changes necessary for them to progress.

    That is why the next three years see the biggest ever investment in our schools and health services. Not just one year. But the year after that and the year after that as well. And at the same time we are maintaining a prudent fiscal policy. We will not put into jeopardy the platform of stability which has been created through tough discipline both in fiscal and monetary policy.

    This new investment is a testament to our faith in public services. But while more money is a necessary condition of success, it is not a sufficient one. Public services must also dramatically improve their productivity, efficiency and performance. Service users and taxpayers have a right to expect that their hard-earned money is not only being spent on the right things but is also delivering value for money, that what is available is being used to best effect

    So since the election, we have initiated the most radical reform programme in public services in 50 years. More money is coming on line. Our job now is to make that money work, for the taxpayer and the service users.

    We are modernising public services to ensure that they reflect real needs and deliver what people really want. The challenges of change in the modern world are immense. The technological revolution is changing the way consumers buy and the way we work. New markets and services are created daily. Public services must embrace that change too. We do our banking over the phone or the Internet so we expect to be able to pay our Council tax in similarly convenient ways. Business information lines are increasingly accessible 24 hours a day and we expect local authority information services to be equally convenient.

    There has already been progress and our public services are steadily improving and those responsible deserve our thanks and praise. We want to see high quality services not just in a few exceptional councils but everywhere. We want to see every council aspiring to Beacon status. We want to reward excellence and crack down on failure.

    By doing so we can tackle the variations in performance to bring all standards up to those presently achieved by best. Differences between performance are too marked. For example, a joint Audit Commission and Social Services Inspectorate report covering 29 local authorities found that the cost of home care varied from £7 an hour to £15 an hour. Highlighting and acting on these sorts of differences will help us spread more effective and efficient practice throughout Government.

    Of course, our modernising agenda is not only for local government. We are focusing on concrete improvements and service delivery through every layer of government, setting up new mechanisms for delivering progress and new machinery for monitoring it. That is why we have set ourselves tough output and efficiency targets through Public Service Agreements. Agreements that say in return for extra investment, we want genuine improvements in our public services.

    These targets are being monitored closely to ensure that services are brought up towards the level of the best and that the best is made even better. We will report on progress against these targets in the spring of next year.

    We have also set up a £2.5 billion Capital Modernisation Fund to support innovative capital projects which will further improve the quality of our public services.

    We’ve allocated £430 million to modernise Accident and Emergency departments, giving patients better access to primary care. There’s £170 million to improve security in local communities to help our fight against crime.

    And we have established a new advisory panel – the Public Services Productivity Panel – of outside experts drawn from the private sector. Leading businessmen and women, bringing to the public sector experience of managing change in large complex organisations.

    We are also acting on the need for modernisation in procurement.

    The Government is the largest buyer of goods and services in the country. Our procurement budget totals around £13 billion a year. So there is a lot at stake.

    Following the report by Peter Gershon, the Managing Director of Marconi, into public procurement, we’re streamlining its procurement processes by creating the Office of Government Commerce. This should deliver over £1 billion of efficiency savings over the next three years.

    So our commitment to modernising government is a commitment across the board and it is a commitment for the long term. And Best Value is our commitment to genuine service improvements in local services on the ground where it matters.

    Our focus now is on what really counts – what people get for what we put in. As with Public Service Agreements, the Best Value regime ensures that we focus our efforts on what makes a difference in people’s lives: for example, housing and benefits services, services for the elderly, services for our children.

    Councils need constantly to look for ways of enhancing the service they offer their clients and customers, and to adapt to their changing needs and expectations if we’re honest not something which has not always been a sufficiently high priority in the public sector.

    Best Value is designed to encourage innovation and innovative delivery mechanisms. We need to challenge the tradition which so often in the public sector tilts the risk/reward balance towards the risk averse. There may be something in the nature of public service that tilts the risk/reward balance towards the risk averse. On the one hand, successful initiatives don’t offer material rewards for public sector employees which are available to their private sector counterparts. On the other, a failed approach carries the risk, rightly, of a searching public examination. It is little wonder that public services for years have been run with the goal rather more of avoiding mistakes than trying something new and ambitious. We need to work together to change this into a new culture which encourages the social entrepreneurs which will give us the innovations we need.

    Best Value encourages partnerships with communities by ensuring that community strategies and corporate mission statements are reflected in the review programme. I know that Beverly Hughes will be saying more about this later.

    It’s important to recognise, as we do, that imposing one set of structures from the centre simply will not work. Public services are delivered locally, so they need to be shaped locally, to meet local needs. That is why Best Value is flexible, always focusing on what works best.

    Best Value also allows a marrying of local and of national priorities. Local priorities which are set through local indicators in consultation with service users and local communities; alongside national priorities set by government departments.

    Finally, Best Value recognises the importance of accountability, with review programmes published in annual local performance plans. A new dimension to public accountability, providing local people and communities with a basis for demanding improvements where they are most needed.

    Big steps forward have of course already been taken to prepare for Best Value’s introduction in April. I thank you for all the work that you have done on that. It is great that we have got this far, so quickly. But we need to ensure that small district councils are fully signed up to this programme of reform as well as larger ones.

    We also need to recognise that 1st April 2000 is only the beginning; Implementing Best Value is a major challenge for local authorities in the months and years beyond us.

    But if we change the mindset, devolve ownership of Best Value from managers through to local staff, and again through to the public, the potential rewards will be immense: The best councils will get greater powers – more freedoms and flexibilities to manage the way they see best. The best schools will see lighter touch inspection. Local authorities will have more ability to push forward their case for resources.

    We will be exploring with local government in next year’s Spending Review whether we can reach a new agreement: more and better outputs in return for more freedoms in the way you deliver services on the ground. I think that there is a huge prize for both central and local government and for the wider community.

    Of course these reward for success will not come overnight. Rights need to be earned and trust needs to be built even deeper. But with commitment and dedication, I believe it will happen.

    Our modernising programme of renewal and reform is ambitious and it is demanding. We will be driving it forward year on year. But it is a programme that has the ability and the vision to change the way our public services are run and used for the good of everyone. Best value does offer the best future for local government and all of those it serves. I thank you for the contributions you are making.

  • HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Enhanced role for credit unions [November 1999]

    HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Enhanced role for credit unions [November 1999]

    The press release issued by HM Treasury on 16 November 1999.

    Moves to boost credit unions, announced by Economic Secretary Melanie Johnson today, will provide a new central services organisation and changes to the regulation of credit unions to help them to deliver a more consistent and flexible service to members.

    The announcement accepts recommendations in two reports published today, by the Credit Unions Taskforce, under the chairmanship of Fred Goodwin, and by the Policy Action Team looking at ways to improve individual access to financial services. These found that credit unions can provide safe, low cost loans, which are of particular help to those in disadvantaged communities who have problems gaining access to mainstream credit sources.

    Welcoming these changes Miss Johnson said:

    “As Fred Goodwin’s report on credit unions shows, the way in which they have previously operated has delivered benefits to members, but now needs to be updated to face today’s challenges.

    “Taken together, these measures should ensure an enhanced role for the future. Members should benefit from the improved and cheaper services which the central services organisation can provide, from the greater freedoms proposed, and from greater protection for their savings.

    “These changes follow widespread consultation with the movement and will, together with other initiatives also announced today, help them to play a part in tackling the problems of financial exclusion. The establishment of a central services organisation will, by spreading best practice and drawing on the expertise and resources of banks and building societies, help credit unions to improve the delivery of their services.”

    “The Government expects banks and building societies to play their full part, but in the end it is for the credit union movement – the hundreds of hard working and dedicated volunteers throughout the country – to take advantage of these opportunities.”

    Commenting on the Taskforce report, Fred Goodwin said:

    “Credit unions have proved their worth around the world as financial institutions for those of modest means. The time is right for them to make a substantial contribution to reducing financial exclusion. There is much that banks and building societies can do to help them achieve this goal, and I am confident that they will rise to this challenge.”

    The measures to improve the regulatory framework within which credit unions operate are:

    • increases in the maximum repayment periods for loans
    • greater flexibility in the common bond requirements
    • aligning the maximum amount that can be held in youth accounts with that for adults
    • removal of the maximum membership limit
    • allowing credit unions to charge for ancillary services
    • greater flexibility on disposing of re-possessed collateral
    • further consultation on increasing the sources from which credit unions can obtain credit, and greater flexibility on dividend accounts an improved regulatory framework.

    Announcing the new regulatory regime, Miss Johnson added:

    “We have decided to give the Financial Services Authority the power to make rules for the regulation of credit unions, which will mean in future credit union members will have protection similar to that for bank and building society customers, including membership of a share protection scheme.

    “The FSA has assured the Government that it will supervise credit unions in a way which takes account of the needs of small, voluntary organisations, including their ability to pay fees.

    “The FSA will discuss with other financial institutions the problems which credit unions would face in meeting the costs of regulation, including compensation and Ombudsman schemes. The Government hopes that the financial industry will respond positively and constructively to these discussions. The FSA will also establish a taskforce which will work closely with the sector to ensure a smooth transition.”

  • HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Initiatives to tackle financial exclusion [November 1999]

    HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Initiatives to tackle financial exclusion [November 1999]

    The press release issued by HM Treasury on 16 November 1999.

    Six initiatives to help people in disadvantaged communities excluded from key financial services were announced by Economic Secretary Melanie Johnson as the initial response to proposals in a Treasury Policy Action Team (PAT) 14 report published today.

    These are:

    an improved regulatory framework for credit unions
    a new central service organisation to support and enhance the role of credit unions
    support for more widespread introduction of insurance with rent schemes for home contents insurance
    exploring the possibilities for widening the role of the Social Fund to help those in low-paid employment
    better access to counselling and refinancing for those in debt
    greater disclosure by banks of their provision of services to the socially excluded.

    Welcoming the report, commissioned as part of the initiative to tackle social exclusion in poor neighbourhoods announced by the Prime Minister last year, Miss Johnson said:

    “Financial exclusion limits the ability of many of the poorest in society to have the benefits of the ever increasing range of financial services, eg bank and building society accounts, access to affordable credit and insurance, that the rest of us take for granted.

    “Two million adults in the UK do not use financial services. It means that they pay more for meeting household bills, do not have home contents insurance or save effectively. We need to spread these benefits as widely as possible, and to look for new ways to do so.

    “The Government will announce its full response to the report next year as part of its national strategy for neighbourhood renewal, but we are already looking forward to making progress in three areas.

    “Credit Unions offer people access to cheap small loans, but their impact in Britain so far is much less than in other countries. We will encourage their growth through a new central services organisation which can support new and existing credit unions, and changes to their regulatory arrangements.

    “Home insurance is also a problem. We will look at ways of improving access to insurance services, particularly through insurance with rent schemes, to help more people get, effective and affordable insurance services. We will work with the industry and public sector agencies to develop challenging targets to improve access to insurance services.

    “We want to improve access to affordable credit. One possible development could be the use of the DSS Social Fund to help those in low-paid employment keep out of the hands of high-cost moneylenders. We shall also promote wider access to debt counselling and refinancing for those who already have debt problems.”

    The general theme of the report is that the way forward in tackling financial exclusion is the development of new ways to access and deliver financial services.

    Among the other alternatives identified are: exploring ways in which the network of post offices could contribute to additional delivery channels; greater use of Pay Point bill payment and Money Advice Centres; greater involvement for housing associations and local authorities; and best use of available and developing technologies by all agencies, including banks and building societies, to ensure easier and more open access.

    The report also calls for better designed financial services for those unfamiliar or uncomfortable with existing services, including basic bank accounts – which allow people to pay their essential bills more cheaply without risk of an overdraft, and more attractive household and savings insurance products tailored specifically to their needs.

    Miss Johnson added :

    “The report recognises that there is no single or simple solution. The way forward lies in developing new and alternative means to deliver and provide access to financial services as well as ensuring that those existing services can reach the whole community. It also means ensuring that communities themselves can contribute to progress in helping their members share the access to and use of financial services that the rest of us see as essential and take for granted.

    “It recognises that banks, building societies, credit unions, and local agencies are already working in partnership with Government to achieve practical changes – ways to develop existing and alternative services, seeing commercial as well as social benefit in doing so.

    “The PAT 14 report is against compulsion. It emphasises instead removal of unnecessary barriers, development of the right products, opening up of new delivery channels and consumer education, and the provision of better information about banking services.

    “The Government continues to have high expectations of banks and other financial service providers, including a greater degree of disclosure of services provided to those in deprived neighbourhoods. We will work with the banks on developments in response to this report. We do not want to have to legislate, as some have urged, to compel banks to serve all sections of the community; but if voluntary action is unproductive and monitoring shows insufficient progress, it may be necessary to consider other options.”

  • HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Biggest Reform of Public Finance Management since the Gladstone Era [November 1999]

    HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Biggest Reform of Public Finance Management since the Gladstone Era [November 1999]

    The press release issued by HM Treasury on 19 November 1999.

    The biggest reform and modernisation programme in the management of the country’s public finances since the Gladstone era was announced today by Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Andrew Smith.

    The Government Resources and Accounts Bill (RAB), published today, is part of the government’s fiscal framework aimed at its modernising agenda and is to apply the financial reporting practices of the private sector and much of the public sector to central government.

    Welcoming the Bill, Andrew Smith said:

    “Resource Accounting and Budgeting is a vital part of our modernising agenda and this Bill marks a major milestone on our way to full implementation. It demonstrates this Government’s commitment to introducing best-practice accounting methods in line with the Code for Fiscal Stability.

    “Through Partnerships UK, the Bill will also give the public sector access to private sector skills. I want to see the progression of well-structured Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and Public Private Partnership (PPP) projects delivered in all sectors of the economy. This will bring about improved front line services to the public, increased deal flow togther with a reduction in the cost, delay and uncertainty by bidders for PFI projects.”

    The main purposes of the Bill are:

    • to introduce Resource Accounting and Budgeting into Government accounts and to modernise the operation of other aspects of the Exchequer and Audit Departments Acts;
    • to provide enabling legislation for the preparation and audit of consolidated accounts for the whole public sector;
    • to spend the money required to set up Partnerships UK to facilitate a new body designed to make the public sector a better client in PFI/PPPs.

    The Resource Accounting and Budgeting Bill will improve the way Parliament votes and scrutinises public spending. Objectives and outputs will be costed through RAB, underpinning the Public Service Agreements. There will also be better information on buying and using assets with improved comparisons between PFI/PPP projects and government capital spending.

  • Stephen Timms – 1999 Speech at the Launch of the CBI Report on Corporate Venturing

    Stephen Timms – 1999 Speech at the Launch of the CBI Report on Corporate Venturing

    The speech made by Stephen Timms, the then Financial Secretary to the Treasury, on 11 November 1999.

    Introduction

    1. Thank you for inviting me to speak to you today. Over the past two and a half years this Government has started to build a new Britain which we want to be modern and decent – a new enterprise economy open to all the talents. That’s why the Chancellor set out on Tuesday as ambitions for the next decade the goals that we should have productivity moving closer to our major competitors, a larger proportion of people in work, halve the number of children in poverty, and for the first time over half of our school leavers should go on to study for a degree.
    2. For too long British investment has been too low, productivity increases too slow, the potential of new markets, new technologies and new skills too often squandered. I want that to change and for corporate venturing to fulfil its potential in the new Britain, promoting long term investment across British businesses. 

    The report

    1. The CBI/Natwest report into corporate venturing is a timely piece of research – highlighting the important benefits that corporate venturing can bring.
    2. Compared to the US, corporate venturing in this country barely skims the surface of the investment pond. When I was in Silicon Valley, in September, I met Stephen Nachtsheim, the Vice President for Corporate Business of Intel. He told me that Intel had invested over $3 billion dollars in more than 250 companies – most of them start-ups – some working from the owners’ garage. Corporate venturing is having a big impact on they way Intel does business and is as integral to their corporate strategy.
    3. Case studies in the report show that companies outside the US have also benefited from corporate venturing. Reuters, the information service provider, is helping to reshape its business through corporate venturing. 3M is using corporate venturing as a part of its growth strategy for the continued generation of new ideas, products and technologies.
    4. But examples like these outside the US are scarce. The report says, many large firms still don’t really know what corporate venturing is. And that worries me.
    5. We are in an era where business is changing dramatically, where the difference between business success and failure is the speed at which new technologies are adopted. British business is missing out on the benefits of corporate venturing.
    6. For example, in 1997, Intel conducted virtually no business on the Internet. In 1998, their Internet business had risen to 20 per cent thanks to corporate venturing. And this year they expect to carry out a staggering 50 per cent of all their business over the World Wide Web. It is becoming ever more noticeable that in the relentless competition of today’s global markets, large Goliaths of industry who cannot defeat the quicker Davids join them instead – creating innovative strategic partnerships – or symbiotic relationships as Patricia Hewitt called it – to the benefit of both firms. 

    PBR measures

    1. Enterprising attitudes are necessary in both established firms and new businesses. We need an enterprising culture which reflects the attitudes across society – attitudes to risk, reward and failure, and wealth creation.
    2. In the 1999 Budget we set out our intentions for a new tax incentive to promote corporate venturing. Following consultation, Gordon Brown announced on Tuesday in the Pre-Budget Report that we will provide an up-front corporation tax relief of 20 per cent for all large companies that invest in growing companies for over 3 years. This underwrites one fifth of their investment and takes into account the needs of Britain’s small high-tech firms.
    3. But we don’t just want companies to invest through corporate venturing once, we want them to become serial corporate venturers. Your report drew some interesting conclusion about the success of corporate venturing. 80 per cent of alliances were still going forward. 50 per cent of firms had gone on to undertake further partnerships.
    4. So our measures go further.
    5. To encourage serial corporate venturing, if a corporate venturer sells its investment at a profit and reinvests again through corporate venturing, it can defer the corporation tax charge on the gain.
    6. This incentive could be worth up to £100 million if businesses rise to the challenge and invest £500 million through corporate venturing .
    7. A thriving enterprise economy calls for a larger number of small businesses. That is why the Pre-Budget Report contained a number of new incentives for small businesses – the backbone of our economy. But we know that investments in smaller higher-risk trading companies are more risky. That is why as part of the corporate venturing tax relief we are providing a capital write-off against income for investments that do not work. Depending on the loss, a corporate venturer will be able to get additional relief of up to £24 for every £100 it has invested.
    8. These tax relief measures provide strong financial incentives to undertake corporate venturing. But, I agree with Patricia that corporate venturing is about more than money. So we will continue to work with the Department of Trade and Industry, developing further non-tax measures to help create a corporate venturing culture.
    9. Your research found that 38 per cent found partners through informal Networks. While I was in Silicon Valley I went to a meeting of the MIT/Stanford Venture Lab. This is a public forum where entrepreneurs, managers and investors can meet and learn about the small firms. I hope the CBI’s programme of regional seminars following this report will start the ball rolling in the UK. But we also need to look at other ways of encouraging dialogue between established companies and new firms.
    10. We need to take corporate venturing into the boardrooms of the largest corporates and into the workshops and laboratories of our smallest firms. We must get the message across that corporate venturing can provide finance, support and technical expertise to turn innovative talent into commercial success.

    Conclusion

    1. Corporate venturing has been a mainstream in the US economy since the 1960s and has had a big impact on the shape of their economy. Let us now grasp this opportunity to make corporate venturing a success for British businesses as well.
    2. Thank you.
  • Stephen Timms – 1999 Speech at Launch of Management Consultancy Best Practice Statement

    Stephen Timms – 1999 Speech at Launch of Management Consultancy Best Practice Statement

    The speech made by Stephen Timms, the then Financial Secretary to the Treasury, on 10 November 1999.

    Introduction

    1. I am delighted to launch this Statement of best practice working relationships between Government and the key consultancy associations. The Statement is a clear demonstration of this Government’s intention to work more closely and more effectively with its suppliers. I would particularly like to welcome the three parties who have worked so hard together to get this far: The Management Consultancies Association (represented by Chris Harrison, Vice Chairman), The Institute of Management Consultancy (represented by Richard Popple – President) and the Treasury’s Procurement Group (represented by Mike Burt).

    Procurement

    1. Improving procurement is part and parcel of this Government’s wider modernisation programme for the public services. Central Government is the largest buyer of goods and services in the country. Our procurement budget totals £13 billion, and that includes half a billion pounds a year spent on consultancies. So there is a lot at stake.
    2. The need for change has been given new urgency by the rapidly changing nature of the public sector’s relationship with the private sector.
    3. The Government’s dealings with the private sector have increased both in number and in complexity so the Government’s procurement activity has also become more complex.
    4. Take for example the enormous investment process that is now underway in IT. Or the opportunities posed by the Internet and electronic commerce, for organising Government activities in new, innovative and more effective ways. All of these changes demand a new emphasis on professional procurement and a new approach to it too.
    5. The private sector recognised long ago that procurement processes and procedures were central to the strategic planning and policy of any organisation. The public sector should be no different. Indeed without change in the public sector there will continue to be adverse consequences for the private sector, not least for the suppliers and consultancies with whom we do business.
    6. The problems in Whitehall’s approach to the procurement of committee projects and our procurement are well-known – poor projects definitions, poor project management, poor contract management and poor management of suppliers.
    7. We have also had some nasty surprises. There have been a number of major projects both in fields such as construction and IT which quite frankly have simply gone wrong. They raised the question as to whether the public sector had the professional skills required to define and manage major capital projects of this sort.

    Office of Government Commerce

    1. That’s why towards the end of last year we asked Peter Gershon, Managing Director of GEC Marconi to conduct a review of the structure of procurement and to tell whether we had the organisation, the skills, the processes and procedures that would see us into the next Millennium. His report which we endorsed in July, provides a recipe for swift progress.
    2. The report recommended the setting-up of the Office of Government Commerce which will, on the principle of subsidiarity, support departments by doing things centrally that are best done centrally, while leaving individual units freedom to pursue their individual interests locally where it is clearly best to do so.
    3. The Office of Government Commerce will be responsible for defining the electronic procurement agenda. It will oversee the management of supplier relations and it will be a source of project management skill which will be world class and which it will make available to departments. It will be a single source of authoritative guidance and will manage up the skills available across Whitehall. 

    Best Practice Statement

    1. This Statement is one of the first practical demonstrations of this Government’s commitment to improving its relations with its suppliers, as set out in Peter Gershon’s procurement review. It also puts into practical effect the call by the Modernising Government White Paper for modern and effective Government business. This is the first statement of its kind and I believe can be the model for other expressions of best practice relationships.
    2. It is a clear expression of how client departments and consultants should work together to achieve a mutually beneficial relationship and outcome. It sets out the best practice standards which should be adopted at every stage of the procurement and delivery of the contract. It reflects the real need for both sides of the contract to put behind them the confrontational and adversarial approaches which have too often been a feature of past working relationships and which deliver neither value for money nor the best results for either side, nor ultimately for the taxpayer.
    3. I bring a good deal of conviction to the task of commending the Statement because of my experience of working as a management consultant. I knew well the potential for management consultancy to make an enormous contribution to problem solving in a creative way – but also how much achieving that potential is dependent on a good relationship between client and consultant.
    4. We have developed the Statement with other Government Departments, the Management Consultancies Association and Institute of Management Consultancy on behalf of their members. But if it is to have real impact, its principles must be disseminated to everyone in Government involved in procuring consultancy services and to every consultant employed to deliver those requirements. And I look to everyone present here today to play their part in making this happen. We also recognise the need for its adoption and application to be monitored and fed back to those who will be responsible for reviewing, amending and refining the statement. So we will be putting in place the means for achieving this
    5. Working together with business has been a key theme of this Government. This Statement clearly demonstrates those values. Consultancies, the Government and the taxpayer all stand to gain. With your support, we can ensure that the Statement delivers tangible results, becoming the “yardstick” for modern procurement practices across the UK.
    6. Thank you.
  • HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Competition and regulation in Financial Services Markets [November 1999]

    HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Competition and regulation in Financial Services Markets [November 1999]

    The press release issued by HM Treasury on 9 November 1999.

    Don Cruickshank today welcomed the Government’s response to his Banking Review Team interim report, ‘Competition and Regulation in Financial Services: Striking the Right Balance’, published on 22 July.

    Commenting on Economic Secretary Melanie Johnson’s announcement of the Government response to recommendations in his interim report, he said:

    “I welcome the changes the Government proposes to make to the Bill to ensure that markets in financial services are subject to effective competition scrutiny, and that the right balance is struck between the FSA’s regulatory objectives and effective competition.

    “I made six, quite detailed, recommendations in my Interim Report. For five of them the Government’s proposed changes to the Bill meet the substance of my recommendations. In its proposals for external scrutiny the Government has gone further, and proposed a reporting procedure which will make the FSA’s assessment of competition transparent.

    “My sixth recommendation was that the FSA should be responsible for making the trade off between regulatory and competition outcomes in financial services. I proposed that this should be achieved by giving the FSA a primary competition objective to minimise the anti-competitive effects of its regulatory activity.

    “The Government believes that this outcome can be achieved without giving the FSA a primary competition objective in addition to its regulatory objectives. My concern has always been that the outcome should be as Ministers intend. I am not wedded to any particular means of achieving this, and I will welcome any changes to the Bill which deliver the outcome in practice.”

    “Work on the review of banking services is continuing and I look forward to reporting to the Chancellor early next year.”