Public appointments are still a work in progress

Last week, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) published a report on non-executive appointments to government departments and public bodies. ⁴³ House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts, Non-executive appointments: Thirtieth Report of Session 2023-23 (HC 460), The Stationary Office, 2024, publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5804/cmselect/cmpubacc/460/summary.html  It further reinforces the consensus that delays to public appointments must be addressed, and that better information is key to doing so. This is one of several problems with the public appointments system we highlighted in our report on the topic last year and that have received public attention in recent years.

The PAC was responding to a National Audit Office (NAO) report on non-executive appointments ⁴⁴ Comptroller and Auditor General, Non-executive appointments, Session 2023-24, HC 513, National Audit Office, 2024, www.nao.org.uk/reports/non-executive-appointments/#downloads  that provided new data on the delays in the public appointments system, last published in 2019, and much needed insight into how the Cabinet Office is planning to address them.

Delays have been unacceptably long for years and are only getting worse

The NAO found that the average time between a campaign closing and an appointment being announced was 203 days for appointments made in 2022/23. ⁴⁵ Ibid, p. 6.  Not only is this 17 weeks longer than the government’s stated ambition of 90 days, but it is also eight weeks longer than when figures were last published in 2019. ⁴⁶ Commissioner for Public Appointments, Thematic Review: Concluding competitions within three months of the closing date, July 2019, publicappointmentscommissioner.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Final-Thematic-Review-The-Three-month-aspiration.pdf, p. 4.  While the impact of the pandemic must be taken into account, this deterioration on top of already unacceptably long delays is cause for serious concern.

As research from the Institute for Government has highlighted, such delays are off-putting for potential appointees, particularly busy mid-career candidates who cannot afford months of uncertainty waiting for a decision. Unfilled vacancies also undermine the effectiveness of boards and, over time, erode institutional memory.

In oral evidence given to the PAC before he left his role as permanent secretary at the Cabinet Office, Alex Chisholm suggested that addressing these delays is a ministerial priority, with Baroness Neville-Rolfe leading the government effort to speed up the process. ⁴⁷ House of Commons, Public Accounts Committee, ‘Oral evidence: Non-executive director appointments’, HC 460, 18 March 2024, retrieved 14 May 2024, committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/14523/html/, Q. 59.  In fact, Chisholm claimed that improvements have already been made and that the average time taken for appointments is now 146 days. The PAC rightly points out in its report that it is unclear how many appointments, or over what time period, this number refers to ⁴⁸ House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts, Non-executive appointments: Thirtieth Report of Session 2023-23 (HC 460), The Stationary Office, 2024, publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5804/cmselect/cmpubacc/460/summary.html, p. 10. – and indeed if progress is so easy to achieve one might question why it did not happen sooner.

High quality granular data is the only way to pinpoint the causes of delay

Chisholm identified high ministerial turnover and prolonged security vetting processes as contributing to delays. ⁴⁹ House of Commons, Public Accounts Committee, ‘Oral evidence: Non-executive director appointments’, HC 460, 18 March 2024, retrieved 14 May 2024, committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/14523/html/ , Q. 59, 62.  Clearly these are part of the story, but they are unlikely to be the only factors – previous studies, including ours, have identified the number of ministerial ‘touchpoints’ as a possible issue.

Before the Cabinet Office can set out its plans to reduce delays, as the PAC have recommended, ⁵⁰ House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts, Non-executive appointments: Thirtieth Report of Session 2023-23 (HC 460), The Stationary Office, 2024, p. 5. it must first have a clearer picture of where the bottlenecks in the system are.

In April 2023 the department introduced a new ‘applicant-tracking system’ (ATS) that, if successfully implemented, could be a game-changer in tackling delays. ⁵¹ Comptroller and Auditor General, Non-executive appointments, Session 2023-24, HC 513, National Audit Office, 2024, www.nao.org.uk/reports/non-executive-appointments/#downloads, p. 30.  It aims to consolidate the appointment process for all regulated public appointments into a single system, through which the recruiting body can manage the entire process.

It is not yet clear whether the ATS will live up to its potential. The NAO found both that adoption of the new system by departments is mixed and that there are errors in data entry – although the Cabinet Office is seeking to address these problems with training and guidance. ⁵² Ibid, p. 32.  It is also unclear whether the ATS will collect sufficiently granular data to identify exactly what stage in the process delays are occurring. This is concerning because only data which breaks down each stage of the process into its respective decision points – such as the time taken for ministerial sign-off on the shortlist of candidates, or finalising the schedule for the assessment panel – will be able to successfully identify the cause of delays.

Regular and detailed reporting on the timeliness of appointments (which the Scottish government has been doing for some time ⁵³ Commissioner for Ethical Standards in Public Life in Scotland, Annual Report on Public Appointments 2021/22, 31 October 2022, www.ethicalstandards.org.uk/publication/public-appointments-annual-report-202122, pp. 19-21. ) would avoid ongoing debate over the extent of the problem. The PAC has called for the Cabinet Office to publish data on appointment delays in September 2024 ⁵⁴ House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts, Non-executive appointments: Thirtieth Report of Session 2023-23 (HC 460), The Stationary Office, 2024, publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5804/cmselect/cmpubacc/460/summary.html, p. 5.  – this would be an excellent opportunity to demonstrate both the benefits of the ATS and a commitment to greater transparency.

Diversity and outreach is welcome but must be evaluated

Both the NAO and PAC also raise questions about the Cabinet Office’s efforts to increase the diversity of the applicant pool for public appointments. The Cabinet Office has recently launched an outreach programme, part of which involves ‘roadshows’ being held across the country to encourage potential applicants to apply, with a particular focus on encouraging “regional diversity and diversity of thought”. ⁵⁵ McVey E, ‘Minister McVey's speech on public appointments’, Edinburgh, 28 November 2023, www.gov.uk/government/speeches/minister-mcveys-speech-on-public-appointments

The PAC acknowledge these efforts, though argues more could be done to show their effectiveness, particularly regarding the social or professional backgrounds of applicants, which is currently lacking. This echoes our own research in which we found poor data on the socio-economic diversity of appointments and little focus on recruiting people from under-represented groups. ⁵⁶ Gill M and Dalton G, Reforming public appointments, Institute for Government, 18 August 2022, www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/reforming-public-appointments , p. 36.

For now, the jury is still out

Regular, high quality data has long been elusive. Only time will tell whether the new tracking system can solve this perennial problem. To its credit, the Cabinet Office is moving in the right direction. But debate over the causes of delay will continue until the system has been fully and consistently adopted by all departments and sufficiently granular data has been published.