← Back to House of Commons Debates
Office for Value for Money 2025-01-20
20 January 2025
Lead MP
Meg Hillier
Debate Type
General Debate
Tags
EmploymentNorthern Ireland
Other Contributors: 7
At a Glance
Meg Hillier raised concerns about office for value for money 2025-01-20 in the House of Commons. Other MPs contributed to the debate.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Opened the debate
The Office for Value for Money is a short-lived, year-long body with only 12 out of its planned 20 staff members in place as of December. It has not yet determined which areas it will study or how it will evaluate its effectiveness. There are concerns about duplication with existing bodies and the need for clear deliverables to avoid wasting taxpayer money.
Harriett Baldwin
Con
West Worcestershire
Highlights the importance of value for money in areas like flood defences, noting that spending can prevent catastrophic impacts such as those caused by flooding.
Richard Fuller
Con
North Bedfordshire
Questions whether the Office's efforts will dissipate due to vague remit and limited personnel. Asks for clarity on specific areas of investigation to monitor impact effectively.
John Grady
Lab
Glasgow East
Emphasises the importance of value for money in public spending, especially in light of historical waste under previous governments and higher income tax rates in Scotland. Advocates for clear suggestions from the Office to improve future spending.
Dorking and Horley
Expresses concern about the Office's ability to deliver value for money with only 12 out of its planned 20 staff members. Asks what additional steps would reassure that the body can offer value.
John Glen
Con
Salisbury
Welcomed the Office for Value for Money's time-limited nature and intention to study high-risk areas of cross-departmental spending. Highlighted the uncertainty over investment at Porton Down, suggesting this as an area the new body should evaluate.
Julian Lewis
Con
New Forest East
Asked for clarification on the Office for Value for Money's terms of reference and its ability to investigate any project causing concern. Criticised the lack of specificity regarding areas of focus, suggesting a broad scope without clear objectives.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Asked about agency staff costs in the health service being 15% above permanent nurse pay, questioning whether this represents value for money. Suggested investigating how permanent jobs could be allocated to achieve savings.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.