Policy@Manchester Articles

Expert insight, analysis and comment on key public policy issues

  • All Posts
  • UK Politics
  • Energy and Environment
  • Growth and Inclusion
  • Health and Social Care
  • Urban
  • Science and Engineering
Policy@Manchester Articles: Whitehall Watch
You are here: Home / Whitehall Watch / Targets? What targets? Change and Continuity in the performance regime in Whitehall

Targets? What targets? Change and Continuity in the performance regime in Whitehall

Colin Talbot By Colin Talbot Filed Under: Whitehall Watch Posted: August 20, 2012

We were told, when the new Coalition Government came to be, that it would put an end to “New Labour targetry”. The use of targets for public sector performance had become a bête noir of both Conservatives and Liberal Democrats in Opposition and they apparently couldn’t wait to scrap the whole lot once they were in power.

And indeed they did immediately scrap the Public Service Agreements (30) and Departmental Strategic Objectives (95 for the Departments we have counted).

But for the past two decades I have had this annoying habit – I don’t believe Governments, especially about these sorts of things. So I have done what I usually do and gone and counted. And the answers are surprising, even to me.

What we* counted was two things.

First, we counted (for 17 departments) how many high level Departmental Strategic Objectives  (DSOs) they had at the end of the Labour Government in 2010. (We ignored the 30 PSA targets, because these were now ‘whole of government’ targets’).

Second, we counted how many high-level targets we could find that equated to DSOs in the Departmental Business Plans (DBPs) published by the Coalition in 2011 and 2012.

Under New labour these departments had 95 targets, but under the Coalition this jumped to an average of 453 for the past two years, or a 476% increase on the previous number of targets. (To be fair, if we added back in the 30 PSAs this reduces to only a 362% increase.)

Also to be fair to the Coalition, the total for 2011 was 510 but by 2012 that had come down to 395, so they are on a downward trend – but at that rate it’ll be the end of the parliament before they get back down to New Labour’s level of ‘targetry’.

And of course the Coalitions ‘targets’ are somewhat different, in the sense that they tend to target different things in different ways – for example many are targets to deliver policy change X or reorganisation Y by a specific date. (But like the previous government they have already developed a habit of quietly dropping, or changing, targets they didn’t meet).

We will be publishing a much more detailed analysis of this phenomenon in due course, but these headline findings were so stark we thought it was worth sharing them straightaway.

Department

New Labour Targets

(2010)

Coalition Targets (Average for 2011 and 2012)

Increase in Number of Targets

Education

6

25

+19

Treasury

2

24

+22

Home Office

7

35

+28

Defence

3

24

+21

Justice

5

36

+31

HMRC

3

5

+2

Foreign Office

10

17

+7

Health

3

33

+30

Energy & Climate

7

18

+11

Work and Pensions

8

37

+29

Transport

4

17

+13

Int’l Development

7

21

+14

Environment

8

17

+9

Culture, Media, Sport

4

27

+23

Local Government

6

37

31

Business

6

49

43

Cabinet Office

6

35

29

TOTALS

95

453

358

AVERAGES

6

27

21

(* thanks to Roberta Akpan, a student at Manchester, for her research assistance).

About Colin Talbot

Colin Talbot is a Professor of Government, a former Specialist Advisor to the House of Commons Treasury Select Committee and the Public Administration Select Committee and has appeared as expert witness many times in Parliament, the Scottish Parliament and NI Assembly. He's also advised Governments from the USA to Japan.

Trackbacks

  1. Whitehall Watch says:
    January 9, 2013 at 11:41 am

    […] 16. Targets? What targets? Change and Continuity in the performance regime in Whitehall […]

  2. Targets, what targets? Now Perm Secs targets are “published” | Whitehall Watch says:
    January 28, 2013 at 11:14 am

    […] indeed sweep away Public Service Agreements (PSAs) and Departmental Strategic Objectives (DSOs) in a previous post. But I also pointed out that they had replaced them with elaborate Departmental Business Plans in […]

  3. Targets, what targets? | Public Finance Opinion says:
    January 28, 2013 at 12:33 pm

    […] sweep away Public Service Agreements (PSAs) and Departmental Strategic Objectives (DSOs) in a previous post. But I also pointed out that they had replaced them with elaborate Departmental Business Plans in […]

Our RSS feed

Receive our latest content and timely updates by subscribing to our RSS feed.

 Subscribe in your reader

More from this author

  • The UK after the Referendum: all that is solid melts into air…..
  • SR2015: £35bn on debt interest? But what about the £375bn held by the Bank of England?
  • SR2015: Spending: Is 36% of GDP still his target?

Become a contributor

Would you like to write for us on a public policy issue? Get in touch with a member of the team, ask for our editorial guidelines, or access our online training toolkit (UoM login required).

Disclaimer

Articles give the views of the author, and are not necessarily those of The University of Manchester.

Policy@Manchester

Manchester Policy Articles is an initiative from Policy@Manchester. Visit our web site to find out more

Contact Us

policy@manchester.ac.uk
t: +44 (0) 161 275 3038
The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK

Copyright © 2025 · Policy Blog 2 on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in