Working toward more accurate regional expenditure data, and fairer regional funding formulae in the UK
Submitting Institution
University of OxfordUnit of Assessment
Politics and International StudiesSummary Impact Type
EconomicResearch Subject Area(s)
Economics: Applied Economics
Studies In Human Society: Policy and Administration
Summary of the impact
Research by Professor Iain McLean and his team has demonstrated that for
more than 30 years, the process of distributing public expenditure to the
regions of England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales was hampered by
inadequate data and inappropriate policy targets. Since 2008, this work
has had two principal impacts: (1) it has informed a change in the
Treasury's methods of collecting and calculating regional expenditure
data, information which is used to guide policy across all government
departments; and (2) it has contributed to the acceptance of needs-based
regional funding as an appropriate policy target, and has laid the basis
for a fundamental reform of the funding arrangements for Scotland and
Wales.
Underpinning research
The research was carried out at the University of Oxford by Iain McLean
(Professor of Politics), who joined the Department of Politics and IR in
1993. He has a long record of research and publication on spatial issues
in taxation and public expenditure; he led the Public Expenditure
Research Group (19 collaborators and staff) examining regional
expenditure data, and has carried out work on the fiscal transfer
formulae.
Since their introduction in 1888, UK regional funding formulae have
relied on poor data and have been hampered by a lack of clear objectives
as to whether funding should be distributed per capita or
allocated in a needs-sensitive way. McLean's research on the regional
funding regime has demonstrated inadequacies in the underlying regional
expenditure data, and recommended improvements to the methods used for its
collection and calculation. This work has laid the basis for a better and
more accurate understanding of the distortive effects of the regional
funding formulae, and for McLean's recommendations to reform the formulae
in order to achieve fairer and more needs-based outcomes. Work in both of
these areas is central to the impacts described below.
(a) Developing a methodology to produce reliable expenditure data
In the early 2000's the Treasury (and researchers including McLean)
expressed concern about the reliability of official data on public
expenditure per head in the nine regions of England and in the devolved
administrations of Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Flawed data
could undermine the usefulness of the Treasury's Public Expenditure
Statistical Analyses (PESA) as a source of information to guide
policy affecting the regions across the full range of government
departments. As a result of his expertise in this area [R2], the
Treasury asked McLean to assess the quality of the data and he assembled a
research group to do so. The year-long research programme, launched in
2002, examined the level and form of public expenditure (domestic and
European) to the regions. It revealed substantial inadequacies and
significant variability in the data, inconsistencies in reporting data
between government departments, and conceptual and methodological
differences underpinning regional reporting [R4, R6]. It also drew
attention to the fact that different definitions of regional expenditure
were used not only across government departments, but also by the Treasury
and the Office for National Statistics. The research made a number of
recommendations to improve data quality in 2003 that were summarized in
the McLean Report (Identifying the Flow of Domestic and
European Expenditure into the English Regions) [R6]. One of
McLean's central recommendations was that departments should use real
expenditure data whenever possible, rather than assume that spending per
head was equal in each region as had often been done in practice. McLean's
Public Expenditure Research Group included several co-researchers
at the University of Oxford: A. McMillan (Post-Doctoral fellow 2003 to
2006), C. Wlezien (Reader in Comparative Government 2002-2007), S.N.
Soroka (Post-Doctoral fellow 2000-2002) and G. Cameron (University
Lecturer 2000-2006, University Reader in Macroeconomics, 2006 (deceased
2007)).
(b) Demonstrating the inadequacy of the existing funding formulae
McLean's research then addressed how a more accurate and more
incentive-compatible regime of transfers might be introduced to replace
the Barnett Formula which has historically been applied to determine the
block grant to the three devolved administrations of the UK — Scotland,
Wales and Northern Ireland. This work demonstrated that the Barnett
Formula, which is population-based and takes no account of relative needs,
has benefitted Scotland and disadvantaged Wales. McLean showed equal
spending per capita to be an inappropriate policy target [R1, R3],
and recommended that fairer and less distortive regimes of territorial
transfers should be introduced to replace the Barnett Formula. The
research argued that the introduction of a needs-based formula to replace
Barnett would not undermine a devolved government's autonomy in making
decisions on public spending, and recommended that proposed replacements
for the Barnett Formula should increase the options for devolved
administrations to raise revenue and enhance fiscal responsibility [R5].
References to the research
[R1] McLean, I., The Fiscal Crisis of the United Kingdom.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan 2005. ISBN 1-4039-0366-2.
[R2] McLean, I., `Editorial: Statistics and devolution in the UK',
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, vol.162 (2),
1999, pp. 133-6. ISSN 0964-1998.
[R3] McLean, I. and McMillan, A `The distribution of public
expenditure across the UK regions', Fiscal Studies 24:1, March
2003, pp. 45-71. ISSN0143-5671.
[R4] Soroka, S., N., Wlezien, C. and McLean, I., `Public
expenditure in the UK: how measures matter', Journal of the Royal
Statistical Society Series A, vol. 169 (2), 2006, pp. 255-71. ISSN
0964-1998.
[R5] McLean, I., and McMillan, A., State of the Union:
Unionism and the Alternatives in the United Kingdom since 1707.
Oxford: Oxford University Press 2005. ISBN 0 19 924820 1.
The quality of McLean's research is demonstrated by:
(i) The award of the Political Studies Association's W. J. M. Mackenzie
Prize for [R5] as the best book in political science published
during 2005.
(ii) The Publication of [R2] (McLean, `Editorial: Statistics and
devolution in the UK', Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series
A) as the invited lead article in the top UK statistical journal.
(iii) The large competitively awarded research grants that funded the
research, including: £56,000 from the Leverhulme Trust 1999 (research
started in 2001) for `Attitudes towards the Union'; £144,000 from
the ESRC in 2007 for `Options for Britain II'; and £106,000 from
the Gatsby Foundation, the Gwilym Gibbon Fund, and an internal (peer
reviewed) Oxford University research fund (John Fell Fund).
Details of the impact
The two central impacts of McLean's research have been (1) to contribute
to a change in the Treasury's methods of collecting and calculating
regional expenditure data, now used to guide policy and analysis, and (2)
to shape acceptance of a needs-based approach to regional funding as an
appropriate basis for the reform of funding arrangements for Scotland and
Wales.
(1) Contributing to a change in the methods for recording and
calculating regional public expenditure across all UK
government departments
HM Treasury accepted the recommendations of the McLean Report on
recording and calculating regional expenditure data in full. Following
specific recommendations of the report, HM Treasury and the Office for
National Statistics (ONS) developed a joint approach to the calculation of
more reliable figures on domestic (and European) regional expenditure to
inform the Public Expenditure Statistical Analysis (PESA). In
2008, the Treasury rolled out requirements for all departments to use
these methods for collecting and issuing data and provided detailed
guidance based on the McLean Report on how to attribute various
types of spending in the now annually required PESA return. This allows
policy debates to be informed increasingly by a more accurate picture of
the fiscal position of the UK's twelve regions [C1].
The McLean Report also underlined that appropriate data reports
should be produced for policy- makers; tailored reports are now used to
assess specific outcomes such as the effects of formula funding, demand
driven expenditure, and expenditure based on policy decisions. The impact
of these changes has been gradual, as departments have increasingly
produced better data. Only now, for instance, is the true level of EU farm
support across the UK's regions becoming clear, and McLean's methods
continue to underpin Treasury initiatives. As the Permanent Secretary at
HM Treasury noted in his opening remarks, at recent meeting for academics
working on public finance (25.01.2013), "we use the McLean Report all the
time here" [C2]. As well as informing PESA, McLean's analysis is
also used by the ONS in order to produce their regional Gross Value Added
tables and by the Scottish Government for the publication of their annual
expenditure and revenue publication [C2].
The beneficiaries of the reforms to the Treasury's Public Expenditure
Statistical Analysis include not only politicians, civil servants,
analysts, and journalists who rely on the PESA statistics to make
assessments of the effects of regional spending, but also stakeholders in
discussions about the spatial redistribution of public expenditure in the
UK. For example, this data is used in the Institute for Public Policy
Research's (IPPR) analysis of public funding in the North of England which
provides northern stakeholders with a better evidence base and an
understanding of the spending review process; the data is also used in
current debates about Scottish independence [C3].
(2) Shaping efforts to replace the Barnett Formula by a fairer
funding formula responsive to needs
McLean's analysis of the limitations of the Barnett formula has shaped
acceptance of the need for a change of the funding formula for Scotland
and Wales and the wider policy debate about fiscal devolution.
Scotland: McLean's research on the effects of the Barnett Formula
contributed to the launch of a joint initiative by the UK government and
Scottish Parliament to replace Barnett as the mechanism to adjust public
expenditure for Scotland. McLean was appointed to the Independent Expert
Group, which advised the Calman Commission on Scottish Devolution
in 2008-9 with a view to improving the financial accountability of the
Scottish Parliament [C4]. The Expert Group's four reports were
adopted by the Commission, including its core recommendation that the UK
should vacate 10p in the pound of Income Tax for Scottish taxpayers, and
that the Scottish Parliament should be required to set a rate for funding
devolved services. This recommendation became part of the Scotland Bill.
Independently of the Expert Group's work McLean also contributed to the
wider policy debate about the funding regime for Scotland by giving
evidence to the Scotland Bill Committee of the Scottish Parliament [C5],
and by publishing in the media on the Calman proposal to make the Scottish
Parliament responsible for decisions at the margin between taxing less and
spending more [C6].
The Scotland Bill was endorsed by both the Scottish and UK Parliaments
and now forms the Scotland Act 2012 [C7], which is set to create a
democratically elected and fiscally responsible Parliament for the first
time since 1707. If the Scottish people reject independence, the Scotland
Act will come into operation immediately. If they accept independence, the
scheme will remain available to both governments — Scotland and UK — as a
model for reforming fiscal transfers. In either case, the Barnett Formula
is now likely to expire and to be replaced a more needs-guided approach.
Wales: McLean's research insights on the Barnett formula [R1]
also played a role in informing the proposal by the Independent
Commission on Funding and Finance for Wales (the Holtham
Commission) to replace Barnett with a needs-based funding regime for
Wales. The Commission was established by the Welsh Assembly Government to
consider the benefits and drawbacks of the Barnett Formula, and to
identify possible alternative funding mechanisms including tax-raising and
borrowing powers. McLean was invited twice to speak at the Holtham
Commission in 2009-10, and presented evidence on the effects of the
Barnett Formula and arguments for a more needs- based funding regime [C8].
His analysis that the Barnett Formula failed to give Wales a block grant
that was commensurate for its needs was accepted by the Commission. In its
final report, published in July 2010, the Commission recommended that the
Assembly Government should pursue the introduction of a needs-based
formula for determining the Welsh block grant instead of the Barnett
Formula, a recommendation that is entirely consistent with McLean's
arguments and findings [C9]. The Holtham Commission's
final report was welcomed by Labour, Conservative and Plaid Cymru
politicians and is contributing to the growing weight of evidence against
the Barnett Formula in the debate about the funding regime for Wales.
In sum, McLean's research has generated impacts of UK-wide reach and
lasting significance: the McLean Report informed the Treasury's
reforms of the PESA-regime which has resulted in more accurate regional
expenditure data across the United Kingdom. This change allows policy and
debate to be informed increasingly by the true fiscal position of the
twelve UK regions. The revised data has also helped McLean to demonstrate
the need to reform the Barnett Formula, which influenced the conclusions
of the Calman and Holtham Commissions, as well as the
fiscal structure for Scotland envisaged in the Scotland Act 2012, and
contributed to the growing acceptance of a needs-based formula for
determining the block grant for Wales.
Sources to corroborate the impact
[C1] The Treasury report, Public Expenditure Statistical
Analysis (2008), includes reference to the McLean report and the
detailed guidance that has been developed since (Chapter 9.23.)
http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/hc0708/hc04/0489/0489.pdf
[C2] Senior Treasury Official confirms use of the McLean report
and the long-term effects of PESA reform, use by ONS and contribution to
devolution debates.
[C3] Use of HM Treasury, Public Expenditure: Statistical Analyses
2012 (the revised PESA data) by IPPR North's analysis of regional spending
and the spending review, for example in
http://tinyurl.com/IPPR-north
[C4] Confirmation of McLean's appointment and role on the IEG from
the Secretary to the Calman Commission.
[C5] Full transcript of the evidence given by Iain McLean to The
Scottish Parliament, Scotland Bill Committee
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/28862.aspx?r=6054&mode=html
[C6] The Scotsman article: Calman puts good deal on the table 9
January 2011
http://www.scotsman.com/news/iain-mclean-calman-puts-good-deal-on-the-table-1-1496109
[C7] The Scottish Parliament gave its unanimous consent to the
Scotland Bill on April 18, 2012 and the House of Commons approved the Bill
on April 26. It received Royal Assent on May 1 to become the Scotland Act
2012. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/constitution/Scotland-Bill
[C8] First report. Funding devolved government in Wales: Barnett
& beyond July 2009
http://wales.gov.uk/docs/icffw/report/090708barnettfullen.pdf
includes reference to McLean's evidence p.39 & 61).
[C9] The Final Report of the Holtham Commission. Fairness and
accountability: a new funding settlement for Wales July 2010. See p.178
for reference to McLean's evidence
http://wales.gov.uk/docs/icffw/report/100705fundingsettlementfullen.pdf