A tailored financial reporting regime for small, low-risk bodies would allow for more meaningful reports and free up time for frontline delivery. Financial reporting requirements are disproportionately 2 onerous for smaller, low-risk bodies. The costs of producing and auditing lengthy, overly detailed annual reports and accounts often outweigh the associated accountability benefits. HM Treasury acknowledges that specific requirements, such as lease disclosures, could be simplified. However, i...

Accountability in small government bodies

Skip to main content

Accountability in small government bodies

Seventy-Seventh Report of Session 2024–26

Author:

Committee of Public Accounts

Related inquiry:

Accountability in small government bodies

Date PublishedFriday 24 April 2026

Download and Share

Download icon

Download the Report [PDF, 284 KB]

Share icon

Copy URL

Contents

Summary

There are many small central government bodies that span a wide range of public functions such as regulating markets and professions, protecting consumers, overseeing elections and public appointments, resolving disputes and supporting research. Despite their small size, these bodies are largely required to produce the same annual reports as large, high-risk organisations. This means they must publish long and complex reports in which it can be difficult for readers to identify the information that matters the most. Producing these documents requires significant time and diverts small bodies’ limited resources from core business activities.

Government’s functional requirements, which cover areas such as digital and procurement, also apply to small bodies. However, these requirements are often tailored to large organisations. Combined with limited specialist expertise within small bodies, this makes it challenging for them to determine which requirements are relevant and how to apply them proportionately. Sponsor departments, shared service providers and the centre of government have the expertise to support small bodies, but they are not always responsive or easy for small bodies to engage with.

Shared corporate services in areas such as HR, estate and finance can often deliver efficiencies and free up resources for frontline delivery. However, small bodies can sometimes deliver back-office functions more efficiently through small, agile in-house teams than through shared services.

The Cabinet Office’s efforts to consolidate small public bodies are progressing too slowly. Consolidating smaller public bodies, where appropriate, can reduce bureaucracy, deliver economies of scale, and strengthen organisational resilience and internal expertise. The Cabinet Office and HM Treasury are exploring opportunities to reduce requirements and improve guidance for small, low-risk bodies. HM Treasury should go further and faster by developing options for a streamlined reporting regime for small bodies that achieves a better balance between efficiency, transparency and accountability.. This would allow small bodies to spend more of their time delivering on their commitments. It would also open up the opportunity to consider which requirements can be streamlined for government bodies of all sizes, to enhance government’s ability to deliver for citizens.

Conclusions and recommendations

1.

The Cabinet Office has not done enough to take forward its
review of public bodies.

Consolidating smaller public bodies into larger organisations, where appropriate, can reduce bureaucracy, deliver savings through economies of scale, and strengthen public bodies’ resilience and internal expertise. Since 2009, successive governments have sought to reduce the number of public bodies. However, they have also created new bodies, without always considering whether establishing a new organisation was the most appropriate way to deliver a policy or programme. In 2025, the Cabinet Office launched the latest review of public bodies, aiming to close them, merge them or reintegrate them into departments if their continued existence cannot be justified. Since then, government efforts have focused mainly on merging large bodies into departments. The review remains ongoing, and there is currently no indication when it will report, or that it will achieve the potential benefits of merging smaller bodies into larger organisations.

recommendation

a.
In its Treasury Minute response to this report the Cabinet Office should update the Committee on progress in consolidating public bodies, including smaller ones.

b.
The Cabinet Office should then update the Committee on an annual basis, until it has concluded its public bodies review and implemented the resulting actions.

c.
At the completion of the review, the Cabinet Office should provide a report to this Committee, giving a full and accurate picture of the full range of public bodies still in existence, the date when they were last reviewed and plans for continuous review to ensure that their existence remains justified and the most effective method to achieve the aims they were set up to fulfil.

2.

A tailored financial reporting regime for small, low-risk bodies
would allow
for more meaningful reports and free up time for frontline delivery.
Financial reporting requirements are disproportionately onerous for smaller, low-risk bodies. The costs of producing and auditing lengthy, overly detailed annual reports and accounts often outweigh the associated accountability benefits. HM Treasury acknowledges that specific requirements, such as lease disclosures, could be simplified. However, it is underestimating the wider benefits that a more proportionate reporting regime for small bodies would deliver. These include improving transparency by making it easier to identify the most meaningful information in small bodies’ annual reports and accounts, and enabling public servants to devote more time to service delivery rather than compliance. Implementing a small body reporting regime will require a single, agreed definition of a small, low-risk body, as HM Treasury currently uses different thresholds for different purposes.

recommendation
HM Treasury should, by 30 June 2026, write to the Committee setting out its definition of a small body and its analysis of the costs and benefits of various options for streamlining the annual reporting requirements for small, low-risk central government bodies. This should include one or more ambitious options to significantly reduce small bodies’ reporting burden which must consider proportionality and a risk-based analysis. For these options, HM Treasury should:

a.
set out the accountability and transparency trade-offs of each option and potential mitigations;

b.
consider which options for simplifying and streamlining requirements might be applicable to larger organisations; and

c.
set out its proposed process for identifying which bodies are suitable for streamlined reporting requirements.

3.

Government’s requirements for delivering specialist functions such as digital and procurement effectively are often ill-suited to small bodies.

Government’s requirements for delivering specialist functions (functional standards) and their associated guidance can be useful to small bodies, but they are often designed with larger organisations in mind. For example, the guidance refers to roles such as complex HR casework specialists and trained fraud risk assessors. Small bodies do not typically have this expertise in-house. Under the “comply or explain” model, organisations may choose not to follow certain elements of the standards, provided they explain their reasons. In practice, however, the standards place more emphasis on “comply” than “explain”, and determining which requirements are relevant can be difficult and time-consuming for small bodies. In response to feedback from small bodies, the Cabinet Office has asked all government functions to review their requirements and to issue guidance on how they can be applied proportionately.

recommendation
In its Treasury Minute response to this report the Cabinet Office should update the Committee on progress with the government functions work to make it easier for small bodies to apply the functional requirements proportionately.

4.

Sponsor departments and the centre of government can do more to help small bodies apply requirements effectively and proportionately.
Small bodies would benefit from greater support to help them comply with requirements. In large organisations, staff can specialise in specific areas and readily draw on the expertise of colleagues. By contrast, small bodies often rely on a few individuals who must cover a wide range of areas and may lack specialist skills to implement certain requirements. Sponsor departments, shared service providers and the centre of government have these skills and can offer valuable support, but are not always easy for small bodies to engage with. Clearer signposting of the support already available would help small bodies access it more effectively.

recommendation
The Cabinet Office and HM Treasury should set out their plans for improving small government bodies’ access to expertise and support from sponsor departments and the centre of government.

5.

Relying on shared corporate services such as HR, estates and
finance is not always
the best option for small bodies.

Shared corporate services, such as estates and IT, have the potential to deliver efficiencies and free up resources in small bodies to focus on frontline delivery. Under the government’s shared services strategy, organisations across the civil service are expected to migrate to shared service centres that will provide HR, payroll and other back-office functions. Small arm’s-length bodies fall within the scope of this strategy. There is the opportunity to build compliance with government requirements into the way shared services are provided. However, the shared services model does not always suit small organisations. In some cases, they can deliver back-office functions more efficiently through small, agile in-house teams.

recommendation
The Cabinet Office should explain how it intends to engage with small central government bodies to ensure that they are only onboarded to shared corporate services if this is beneficial to them as well as to government as a whole. If they choose not to adopt the shared service model, they must clearly justify this decision.

recommendation
The Cabinet Office should update its guidance on commissioning and establishing new public bodies to require departments to assess what level of reporting and governance is proportionate for the proposed body. Where a more streamlined approach is appropriate, departments should set out in the business case:

how the body will draw on sponsor department expertise and support;

whether a low-risk financial reporting regime is suitable; and

when the body will determine its shared services model.

1
Consolidating small bodies

1.
On the basis of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we took evidence from the Cabinet Office and HM Treasury on accountability in small government bodies.
1
We also took evidence from the Government’s Actuary Department, the Office of the Children’s Commissioner and the Ministry of Justice.

2.
There are many small central government bodies. At least 48 central government or parliamentary bodies spent £30 million or less in 2022–23 or had 50 or fewer FTE employees on 31 March 2023. Of these organisations, approximately two-thirds (30) spent under £10 million in 2022–23.
2

3.
Small government bodies are often expected to comply with the same requirements as organisations which have thousands of staff and spend billions of pounds. These include requirements for operating specialist functions like digital and security effectively (functional standards) and for reporting on how organisations use public money (financial reporting requirements).
3

4.
These requirements help deliver many benefits, such as ensuring that government bodies are run efficiently, and that they are accountable to Parliament and transparent to the public. However, complying with requirements involves time, effort and cost. These can often be proportionally greater for small bodies as they have more limited resources and specialist expertise than larger organisations.
4
To support meaningful and efficient compliance and accountability, reporting duties must strike the right balance between accountability and proportionality.
5

Consolidating public bodies

5.
Since 2009, successive governments have sought to reduce the number of public bodies. The government launched the latest review of all public bodies in April 2025, with a view to close, merge or bring functions back into departments if the continued existence of a public body cannot be justified.
6
However, we are not aware of there being any indication of when the review will report.

6.
Since launching the ongoing public bodies review, government’s efforts have focused on consolidating larger bodies. However, there are also significant benefits in consolidating smaller bodies where appropriate, beyond the potential to achieve efficiency savings and economies of scale. The Government Actuary’s Department and the Office of the Children’s Commissioner have told us that they struggle to develop internal expertise, ensure resilience, and that the standards that they are required to comply with are often ill-suited to small organisations.
7

7.
While successive governments have consolidated some public bodies, they have also set up new bodies, including small ones. When our predecessor Public Accounts Committee reported on arm’s-length bodies in 2021, it found that, despite the guidance that creating a new arm’s-length body should be a “last resort”, government often did not rigorously consider the alternatives to setting up a new arm’s-length body.
8

8.
The Ministry of Justice and the Office of the Children’s Commissioner told us that, there can be a sound rationale for having separate small bodies, such as when legislation requires an office holder to be independent.
9
But the opposite is also true. All Government Departments should think carefully about the principles embodied in their report before providing draft legislation setting up new large and small bodies. The government has stated that the reorganisation of public bodies will not affect bodies whose independence from ministerial decision-making is essential, such as those which scrutinise government or protect the rule of law.
10

2
Simplifying requirements for small bodies

Financial reporting requirements

9.
There is no single, commonly agreed definition of a small, low-risk central government body. The NAO report classified central government or parliamentary bodies that spent up to £30 million in 2022–23 or had up to 50 full-time equivalent (FTE) employees on 31 March 2023 as small.
11
HM Treasury has not endorsed this definition of small bodies and uses different definitions for different purposes. For example, it excluded government bodies with expenditure, income, assets and liabilities of less than £30 million from the Whole of Government Accounts 2023–24.
12
It exempted arm’s-length bodies with up to 500 employees or total operating income and funding received up to £500 million from including Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosure (TCFD)-aligned disclosures in their annual reports and accounts.
13
HM Treasury told us that, in principle, it would be preferable to identify which small bodies might be suited for simplified requirements based on their level of risk, although it noted that determining this may be complex and subjective.
14

10.
Small central government bodies are largely subject to the same financial reporting and external audit requirements as large bodies. This is unlike small companies and charities in the UK, and small central government bodies in countries such as New Zealand and Portugal, which benefit from exemptions and simplified requirements.
15
The Office of the Children’s Commissioner told us that it undergoes more detailed audit testing than an academy trust with an expenditure level 20 times higher.
16

11.
The Government’s Actuary’s Department and the Office of the Children’s Commissioner told us that the preparation and audit of their ARAs can be timeconsuming.
17
This limits their ability to pursue other valuable work and brings limited benefits.
18
The Electoral Commission told us in a written submission that compliance with requirements creates a significant workload and can invite a “tick-box” approach designed solely to meet audit expectations, rather than deliver meaningful outcomes.
19
Submissions by academics and by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales noted that the requirements are clearly disproportionate for some smaller public bodies and that there is a strong case for a more proportionate, less onerous reporting framework for small bodies.
20

12.
HM Treasury told us that it is considering opportunities for simplifying disclosures in annual report and accounts, but that it would want to consider the risks and benefits of a streamlined reporting regime for small central government bodies.
21
HM Treasury also told us that savings arising from a small body reporting regime would be modest, and that they would have to be balanced against the loss in transparency arising from less detailed reporting.
22
In our view, if properly implemented, a streamlined small body reporting regime would deliver significant additional benefits. It would free civil servants’ time to deliver their day-to-day job more efficiently.
23
It would enhance accountability and transparency, because removing unnecessary information from annual reports and accounts makes it easier for Parliament and the public to focus on what is important.
24
In a written submission, academics noted that it could also reduce the cost to Parliament of funding the financial audit of small bodies.
25

Requirements for specialist functions

13.
Some aspects of the functional standards, their supporting guidance and self-assessments are better suited to large organisations which have experts in a range of specialist areas than to small organisations which operate in a more agile way.
26
For instance, the Government Actuary’s Department told us that the security standard, which sets expectations for protecting the government’s assets, visitors to government property, third party suppliers whilst engaged on government business, and citizen data, assumes that organisations operate in a very complex system.
27
A submission from the Local Government Boundary Commission for England stated that the complexity and technical language of some standards, along with the lack of guidance tailored to small organisations, increased the challenge of complying with the standards.
28

14.
The functional standards include advisory elements. Organisations can choose to either comply with them or explain why they have not complied with them.
29
The Ministry of Justice told us that this approach is probably more weighted towards “comply” than “explain”.
30
It noted that more openness on when certain types of organisations do not need to follow specific standards would be helpful, for instance through examples or frameworks for decision-making.
31
A submission from the Electoral Commission stated that the “comply or explain” approach does not always allow for flexibility or relevance, and proposed that smaller organisations be provided with more discretion to assess which requirements are relevant to them and to prioritise meeting those requirements.
32

15.
The Cabinet Office told us that, in the light of feedback from government bodies, it has asked the government functions to provide more guidance on how to apply the standards proportionately.
33
The functions are currently revising standards and guidance in the light of Project Reset, which plans to transfer more responsibility for enforcing spending controls from the functions to departments. The Cabinet Office told us that these revisions will consider the perspective of small organisations.
34

3
Support for small bodies

Support from sponsor departments and the centre of government

16.
Some of the functions’ self-assessments and guidance require specialist expertise that small bodies often lack. For instance, the criteria for a ‘good’ level of compliance with the HR standard include escalation to complex casework specialists.
35
Small bodies often rely on their sponsor department to access this expertise.
36
The Ministry of Justice told us that it tailors the support it provides to each of its sponsored bodies based on their operations, budget and risks.
37

17.
Small bodies rely on support from the Cabinet Office, HM Treasury, and other central government bodies to comply with requirements. It can be hard for small bodies to access this support.
38
For instance, the Government Property Agency provides data that the small bodies leasing its office space use to report their performance against the required government sustainability targets. The Government Actuary’s Department told us that the Government Property Agency has at times been difficult to engage with, and that it has had to invest considerable time to bring that relationship to the level it would like.
39

18.
Small bodies are not always aware of the support and resources provided by sponsor departments and the centre of government. The Director of Finance and Operations of the Government Actuary’s Department told us that she is only aware of many forums and groups because she has worked in the civil service for many years.
40
Small bodies told the National Audit Office that they would benefit from better signposting of existing resources.
41

Shared corporate services

19.
Small government bodies often rely on shared corporate services, which are provided by their sponsor department or other organisations. For example, HM Treasury provides IT services and the Government Property Agency provides estates services to the Government Actuary’s Department.
42
The Office of the Children’s Commissioner uses the Department for Education’s accounting package and IT services.
43
The Ministry of Justice provides transactional finance, HR and commercial activity to the Independent Monitoring Authority, Judicial Appointments Commission, Parole Board and Youth Justice Board.
44

20.
Under the government’s shared services strategy, departments are moving HR, payroll and other back-office functions to shared service centres. Arm’s-length bodies are expected to join their sponsor department’s shared service centres.
45

21.
The Cabinet Office told us that greater adoption of shared services across government, including by small bodies, can deliver significant savings.
46
The Cabinet Office, HM Treasury and Ministry of Justice stated that, for small bodies, relying on shared corporate services is more efficient than maintaining specialist capabilities in-house. Shared services can deliver economies of scale and allow for greater sharing of learning between organisations.
47
There is also an opportunity for functions to work with shared service clusters to build compliance with the functional standards into the way shared services will be provided.
48

22.
Small bodies told us that shared corporate services do not always suit them. The Office of the Children’s Commissioner told us that delivering back-office functions, such as payroll, in-house allows it to operate more flexibly, at very low cost, and with fewer processes than by using shared services.
49
A submission by the Pubs Code Adjudicator stated that reliance on its parent department’s HR support can exacerbate its challenges in recruiting staff with the right skills and experience in a timely way.
50
The Government Actuary’s Department explained that it procured its own accounting system rather than adopting its sponsor department’s accounting system, which lacked the timesheet functionality it requires. Procuring its own system was cheaper than adding this functionality to the sponsor department’s system.
51

Formal minutes

Monday 20 April 2026

Members present

Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, in the Chair

Mr Clive Betts

Anna Dixon

Sarah Green

Sarah Hall

Chris Kane

Rupert Lowe

Catherine McKinnell

Sarah Olney

Tristan Osborne

Matt Turmaine

Accountability in small government bodies

Draft Report (
Accountability in small government bodies
), proposed by the Chair, brought up and read.

Ordered
, That the draft Report be read a second time, paragraph by paragraph.

Paragraphs 1 to 22 read and agreed to.

Summary agreed to.

Conclusions and recommendations agreed to.

Resolved
, That the Report be the Seventy-seventh Report of the Committee to the House.

Ordered
, That the Chair make the Report to the House.

Ordered
, That embargoed copies of the Report be made available (Standing Order No. 134).

Adjournment

Adjourned till Monday 27 April at 3.00 p.m.

Witnesses

The following witnesses gave evidence. Transcripts can be viewed on the
inquiry publications page
of the Committee’s website.

Monday 26 January 2026

Indrani Banerjee-Jones
, Director of Finance and Operations, Government Actuary’s Department;
Farhad Chikhalia
, Interim Director for Public Bodies, Ministry of Justice;
Micon Metcalfe
, Interim Director of Finance and Resources, Office of the Children’s Commissioner
Q1-
53

Janet Hughes
, Director General of Public Sector Reform, Cabinet Office;
Conrad Smewing
, Director General Public Spending and Head of the Government Finance Function, HM Treasury;
Andrew Cartner
, Director Public Spending, Deputy Head of the Government Finance Function, HM Treasury
Q54-92

Published written evidence

The following written evidence was received and can be viewed on the
inquiry publications page
of the Committee’s website.

SGB numbers are generated by the evidence processing system and so may not be complete.

1
Ferry, Professor Laurence (Professor, Durham University Business School); Midgley, Dr Henry (Associate Professor, Durham University Business School); and Murphie, Honorary Professor Aileen (Honorary Professor, Durham University Business School) 
SGB0002

2
Electoral Commission 
SGB0005

3
Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales 
SGB0004

4
Local Government Boundary Commission for England 
SGB0003

5
Pubs Code Adjudicator 
SGB0007

List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament

All publications from the Committee are available on the
publications page
of the Committee’s website.

Session 2024–26

Number

Title

Reference

76th

New Hospital Programme update

HC 1705

75th

Government use of data analytics on error and fraud

HC 891

74th

Environmental regulation

HC 1687

73rd

Financial sustainability of adult hospices in England

HC 1236

72nd

BBC World Service

HC 1299

71st

Government’s use of external consultants

HC 1521

70th

Home-to-school transport

HC 1238

69th

Whole of Government Accounts 2023-24

HC 1243

68th

Excess Votes 2024-25

HC 1711

67th

NS&I’s transformation programme

HC 1237

66th

Tackling fraud and error in benefit expenditure 2024-25

HC 1231

65th

Efficiency and resilience of the Probation Service

HC 1235

64th

Costs of clinical negligence

HC 1234

63rd

Increasing police productivity

HC 1239

62nd

Faulty energy efficiency installations

HC 1229

61st

Financial sustainability of children’s care homes

HC 1233

60th

DWP follow-upAutumn 2025

HC 1447

59th

Ministry of Justice follow-upAutumn 2025

HC 1240

58th

Government servicesIdentifying costs

HC 1421

57th

Government servicesGenerating income

HC 890

56th

BBC Accounts and Trust Statement 2024–25

HC 1230

55th

Reducing NHS waiting times for elective care

HC 820

54th

Afghanistan Response Route

HC 1391

53rd

Cost of maintaining the FCDO’s overseas estate

HC 884

52nd

Resilience to threats from animal disease

HC 885

51st

The UK’s F-35 stealth fighter capability

HC 1232

50th

Local bus services in England

HC 892

49th

Administration of the Civil Service Pension Scheme

HC 888

48th

Smarter delivery of public services

HC 889

47th

First Annual Report of the Chair of the Committee of Public Accounts

HC 1300

46th

Improving local areas through developer funding

HC 886

45th

Improving family court services for children

HC 883

44th

Governance and decision-making on major projects

HC 642

43rd

MoD’s oversight of Reserve Forces’ and Cadets’ Associations

HC 893

42nd

Water sector regulation

HC 824

41st

UK Research and Innovation

HC 826

40th

Collecting the right tax from wealthy individuals

HC 827

39th

Government’s use of private finance for infrastructure

HC 821

38th

Increasing teacher numbersSecondary and further education

HC 825

37th

ImmigrationSkilled worker visas

HC 819

36th

Jobcentres

HC 823

35th

Introducing T Levels

HC 822

34th

Department for Business and Trade Annual Report and Accounts 2023-24

HC 818

33rd

Supporting the UK’s priority industry sectors

HC 1070

32nd

The Future of the Equipment Plan

HC 716

31st

Local Government Financial Sustainability

HC 647

30th

Antimicrobial resistanceaddressing the risks

HC 646

29th

Condition of Government property

HC 641

28th

Decommissioning Sellafield

HC 363

27th

Government’s relationship with digital technology suppliers

HC 640

26th

Tackling Violence against Women and Girls

HC 644

25th

DHSC Annual Report and Accounts 2023-24

HC 639

24th

Government cyber resilience

HC 643

23rd

The cost of the tax system

HC 645

22nd

Government’s support for biomass

HC 715

21st

Fixing NHS Dentistry

HC 648

20th

DCMS management of COVID-19 loans

HC 364

19th

Energy Bills Support

HC 511

18th

Use of AI in Government

HC 356

17th

The Remediation of Dangerous Cladding

HC 362

16th

Whole of Government Accounts 2022-23

HC 367

15th

Prison estate capacity

HC 366

14th

Public charge points for electric vehicles

HC 512

13th

Improving educational outcomes for disadvantaged children

HC 365

12th

Crown Court backlogs

HC 348

11th

Excess votes 2023-24

HC 719

10th

HS2Update following the Northern leg cancellation

HC 357

9th

Tax evasion in the retail sector

HC 355

8th

Carbon Capture, Usage and Storage

HC 351

7th

Asylum accommodationHome Office acquisition of former HMP Northeye

HC 361

6th

DWP Customer Service and Accounts 2023-24

HC 354

5th

NHS financial sustainability

HC 350

4th

Tackling homelessness

HC 352

3rd

HMRC Customer Service and Accounts

HC 347

2nd

Condition and maintenance of Local Roads in England

HC 349

1st

Support for children and young people with special educational needs

HC 353

Footnotes

1
C&AG’s Report, Accountability in small government bodies,
HC 948
, 25 June 2025

2
C&AG’s Report, para 18

3
C&AG’s Report, para 19

4
C&AG’s Report, para 2

5
Q 54

6
Cabinet Office,
Hundreds of quangos to be examined for potential closure as Government takes back control
, 7 April 2025

7
Qq 3, 6 and 10; C&AG’s Report, paras 13, 14 and 23

8
Committee of Public Accounts, Government’s delivery through arm’s-length bodies, Eighteenth Report of Session 2021–22,
HC 181
, 24 September 2021

9
Qq 13, 15 and 71

10
Cabinet Office,
Hundreds of quangos to be examined for potential closure as Government takes back control
, 7 April 2025

11
C&AG’s Report, para 9

12
HM Treasury, Whole of Government Accounts: Year ended 31 March 2024,
HC 917
, 17 July 2025, p. 155

13
HM Treasury,
Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosure (TCFD)-aligned disclosure application guidance
, updated 17 July 2025

14
Q 58

15
Q 47; C&AG’s Report, paras 19–20

16
Qq 3 and 23–24

17
Qq 10 and 47

18
C&AG’s Report, para 23

19
Dr Henry Midgley, Professor Laurence Ferry and Honorary Professor Aileen Murphie (
SGB0002
); Electoral Commission (
SGB0005
)

20
The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (
SGB0004
)

21
Qq 57, 62, 70 and 82

22
Qq 57 and 65

23
Q 76

24
Qq 83 and 92

25
Dr Henry Midgley, Professor Laurence Ferry and Honorary Professor Aileen Murphie (
SGB0002
)

26
C&AG’s Report, para 1.14; Q 6

27
Q 7

28
Local Government Boundary Commission for England (
SGB0003
)

29
C&AG’s Report, para. 13

30
Q 30

31
Q 30

32
Electoral Commission (
SGB0005
)

33
Q 67

34
Q 90

35
C&AG’s Report, para 1.14

36
Q 11

37
Q 19

38
Q 12; C&AG’s Report, paras 1.15 and 2.18

39
Qq 10, 12 and 45

40
Qq 43 and 45

41
C&AG’s Report, para 23

42
Qq 3 and 16

43
Qq 9, 11 and 37

44

Letter from the Ministry of Justice
, 4 February 2026

45
Cabinet Office,
Guidance on the undertaking of Reviews of Public Bodies
, updated 25 April 2024, para. 63

46
Q 76

47
Qq 4, 15, 71 and 76

48
C&AG’s Report, para 1.17

49
Qq 13 and 35

50
Pubs Code Adjudicator (
SGB0007
)

51
Qq 40–42