Blog

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Leslie on 2014-04-07.

To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, which 10 consultancy firms were paid the most by her Department in the last financial year; and how much each of those firms was paid.

Mrs Helen Grant

The 10 professional services firms that were paid the most in 2013/14 are listed in the table below:

These are unaudited figures from the Department’s financials systems, net of recoverable VAT. The department uses professional services firms for a variety of purposes. In addition to consultancy services, they include expenditure on external legal support and advice on programmes, research fieldwork, evaluation, specialist technical advice and the provision of interim managers. Legal services from the Treasury Solicitors and providers of recruitment services have been excluded in order to arrive at a list of firms that are predominantly providers of consultancy.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Leslie on 2014-04-07.

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, which 10 consultancy firms were paid the most by his Department in the last financial year; and how much each of those firms was paid.

Brandon Lewis

The table below sets out the ten consultancy firms that were paid the most by my Department in the last financial year

The data complies with definitions on Consultancy laid down by the Cabinet Office which excludes agency staff and interim (contingent) labour.

Financial Year 2013-14

* Local Partnerships is a company that is jointly owned by HM Treasury and the Local Government Association; it provides commercial expertise on matters of infrastructure, legal and contractual complexity and acts for the benefit of the public sector.

My Department has cut spending on consultancy from £36.6 million in 2009-10 to £0.5 million in 2013-14. This represents a saving of £36.1 million a year (2013-14 compared to 2009-10) and has been achieved through contract renegotiations, terminations and adherence to Cabinet Office controls on consultancy spending.

To put this in context, based on current estimates (which reflect accounting consequences from machinery of government changes) the DCLG Group is reducing its annual running costs by around 40% in real terms between 2010-11 and 2014-15. This equates to net savings of at least £532 million over this spending review period and includes savings of around £420 million from the closure of the Government Offices for the Regions.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Leslie on 2014-04-07.

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, which five companies were used most often to provide temporary workers for his Department in the last financial year; and how much in agency fees was paid to each of them.

Brandon Lewis

In answering this question, we have used the Cabinet Office definition for contingent labour (temporary staff) which includes admin and clerical agency staff, interim managers and specialist contractors: use of such staff for short-term or specialist work can be better value for money than hiring staff on permanent contracts.

Details of the five companies that my Department has used most often in the last financial year for the provision of contingent labour are set out below:

Financial Year 2013-14

To put this in context, my Department has cut spending on contingent labour from £14.4 million in 2009-10 to £3.3 million in 2013-14 as a result of the tightening of its internal management controls, institutionalising these in its systems and adhering to Treasury and Cabinet Office spending rules. This represents a saving of £11.1 million a year (2013-14 compared to 2009-10)

In addition to the savings on temporary workers, our departmental audited annual accounts for the core Department show that staff costs fell from £216 million in 2009-10 to £99 million in 2012-13, a reduction of 54% in cash terms, or a further saving of £117 million a year.

These savings also reflect the Coalition Government’s agenda of decentralisation, ending the micromanagement of local government, the abolition of regional government, and the broader need to tackle the deficit left by the last Administration.