Shining a Light: Why Britain Needs a Public Works Register
In an era where private companies routinely provide detailed financial disclosures to their shareholders, the British government's approach to transparency remains stubbornly outdated. Each year, hundreds of billions of pounds flow through government coffers, yet British citizens – the true shareholders of our public institutions – have remarkably little insight into how their money is being used. While the government’s recent promises to focus on "value for money" sound appealing, without genuine transparency, such commitments amount to little more than political rhetoric.
The opacity of government operations creates a perfect environment for inefficiency and waste to flourish. Information about public sector projects and procurement is currently scattered across departments, buried in obscure reports, or simply unavailable to the public altogether. This fragmentation of information doesn't just frustrate taxpayers trying to understand how their money is being spent – it actively hampers parliamentary oversight, prevents meaningful media scrutiny, and makes it nearly impossible for researchers to identify patterns of wasteful spending.
The solution to this challenge lies in embracing the digital age: Britain needs a comprehensive Public Works Register. This would be more than just another government database; it would serve as a searchable, real-time window into the operations of our public sector. By leveraging the newly boosted authority of the centre of digital government at DSIT as a coordinating department, with oversight from the announced Office for Value for Money (OVfM) at the Treasury, we could create a powerful tool for accountability that transforms how citizens interact with their government. More importantly, it would make these two bodies actually have something to do that serves the country rather than just one political party’s design.
The beauty of this proposal lies in its practicality. Much of the necessary infrastructure already exists. The Government Digital Service has already demonstrated some ability to build user-friendly platforms for citizens and civil servants. Dashboards were proving useful in tracking government delivery and Starmer has said that he wants tracking of targets – so let's expand beyond this. Departments already collect vast amounts of data about their operations, spending, and outcomes – they simply aren't required to make this information accessible to the public in a meaningful way. What's missing isn't technical capability but political will.
The New Zealand Infrastructure Commission has implemented a dashboard of its own. Using Tabluea’s API, it tracks 6,058 projects from commission to completion, setting overall project deadlines broken down into different stages. Users are able to filter the projects by the Ministry undertaking the works, the type of project, and where in the country it is. The British government could very easily copy such a system.
Critics might argue that creating such a system would be costly or place an undue burden on civil servants already busy with delivering a new programme for the government. However, this argument misses a crucial point: most of the required data is already being collected for internal purposes or for bodies like the Public Accounts Committee. It’s just fragmented. That means accountability is fragmented. The real change would be in making this information accessible and standardised. Furthermore, the potential efficiency gains from reduced waste and eliminated duplication would likely far outweigh any implementation costs. Citizens, researchers, private sector firms looking to supply into government, the media, and politicians in Parliament would all benefit from simply knowing what’s going on, what’s being spent in detail on what, and how it’s going in terms of delivery.
Security concerns on certain projects could be addressed through careful system design. Not all government information needs to be public – sensitive data related to national security or personal privacy can remain protected while still allowing unprecedented access to information about how public money is spent and what results it achieves.
The timing for such a reform could not be better. Labour's emphasis on value for money provides a natural opening to push for greater transparency. The recent establishment of the Office for Value for Money, combined with existing digital infrastructure and expertise within government, makes implementation more feasible than ever before, and so too does the development of recent AI products and software adoption and diffusion across government.
What's needed now is sustained pressure to make it happen.
The technical implementation would require several key elements working in concert. The system would need standardised reporting protocols across all government departments, integration with existing government systems, and a mix of automated and manual data collection methods. Non-Executive Directors across departments could be given responsibility for data accuracy, while a cross-departmental verification team within DSIT and the OVfM could ensure consistency and reliability.
But the true value of a Public Works Register would extend far beyond simple transparency. By making government operations more visible, we would create natural pressures for better project management and more efficient use of resources. Departments would be incentivised to demonstrate value for money when their activities are open to public scrutiny. The availability of comprehensive data would support evidence-based policy making and enable researchers to identify best practices across government.
Moreover, this transparency would foster innovation. When government data is made accessible, developers, researchers, and civil society organisations can build tools and conduct analyses that further enhance public understanding and oversight. The private sector has long understood that sunlight is the best disinfectant – it's time for the government to embrace the same principle.
The contrast with the current system could not be starker. Today, citizens trying to understand government spending must navigate a labyrinth of departmental websites, freedom of information requests, and dense financial reports. A Public Works Register would transform this landscape, offering a single, comprehensive view of government activities that any citizen could access and understand.
If you’re a firm that has government contracts there is a clear win too, instead of waiting on personal relationships with civil servants to know what’s happening you’d know what’s delayed across a department. Your credit risk and political risk would be decreased, too many firms looking at the state of government finances know the risk of arbitrary cancellation of projects that happen at fiscal events in government. An early heads-up means better planning and more efficient resourcing. More realism, fewer corrections. With the government taking up an increasing amount of economic activity, this is more and more important.
Let's be blunt here. This is basic stuff. Knowing what the government is working on, all in one place, line by line itemisation, delivery schedules, all of us citizens are able to know if civil servants or partner firms are falling behind. Everyone is able to see if the Government and the party in power has been honest with the electorate over its promises and its ability to deliver.
For those serious about government accountability and efficiency, supporting a Public Works Register should be an obvious choice. The technology exists. The infrastructure exists. The only question is whether there's political will to shine a light on government spending. In an age where citizens expect and deserve transparency from their institutions, it's time for the government to step into the light.
