We use essential cookies to make this site work. Cookie Policy · Privacy Policy
© Britain Needs Us 2026. Original research. All rights reserved. Web Archive public record: web.archive.org
A Big-5 consulting grade proposal for rebuilding the connection between citizens, their representatives, and the money spent in their name. Drawing on private equity governance standards, expert procurement methodology, and international democratic reform evidence.
This document submitted for public consultation and government engagement.
This document is a public interest policy proposal prepared by Britain Needs Us for the purposes of democratic engagement, public consultation, and government submission. It does not constitute legal, financial, or professional advice. The proposals contained herein are submitted in good faith as a contribution to public discourse on fiscal transparency and democratic accountability.
All figures cited in this document are derived from publicly available sources including HM Treasury budget documents, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), the National Audit Office (NAO), the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and published academic research. Per-household calculations use the ONS estimate of 28.2 million UK households (2025). Where ranges are given, we use mid-point estimates unless otherwise stated. All figures are expressed in 2025/26 prices unless noted.
This document and its contents are the intellectual property of Britain Needs Us. It may be reproduced in full for non-commercial purposes provided attribution is given. Commercial reproduction requires written permission. Crown copyright materials are reproduced under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
Britain Needs Us accepts no liability for any loss, damage, or consequence arising from reliance on the information contained in this document. Readers should take independent professional advice before acting on any proposals described herein. The savings estimates presented are modelled projections based on international evidence and are not guaranteed outcomes.
This proposal is non-partisan. It does not advocate for any political party, ideology, or candidate. The reforms proposed are structural and institutional in nature and are designed to function regardless of which party holds office. All references to government policy are made in the context of structural analysis, not political commentary.
The United Kingdom spends over £1.2 trillion annually on behalf of its citizens, yet the average household has no meaningful sight of how their contributions are allocated, no structured mechanism to challenge procurement decisions, and no quarterly performance reporting on the services delivered in their name. This proposal introduces five interlocking layers of democratic financial governance, modelled on the standards routinely applied in private equity, FTSE 100 board governance, and international best practice.
The executive summary above is free. The full forensic report — including implementation plans, draft legislation, government submission letters, and the complete budget calendar — is available to subscribers.
Join Voice of Britain — from £1.99/monthThe United Kingdom's fiscal governance model was designed for an era when information moved by letter, budgets were measured in millions, and the average citizen had no expectation of participating in financial oversight. The system has not fundamentally changed since Gladstone's reforms of the 1860s. Meanwhile, comparable democracies have adopted transparency mechanisms that make the UK's approach look antiquated.
UK citizens contribute an average of £35,700 per household annually in direct and indirect taxation. They receive no itemised statement of how this money is allocated. No private company could operate a pension fund, an investment portfolio, or even a gym membership on this basis. The information asymmetry between the state and its funders is the largest in any major democracy.
Central government spends approximately £300 billion per year on procurement. The NAO has repeatedly found that 15–30% of this expenditure represents poor value for money due to inadequate competition, contract mismanagement, and supplier lock-in. There is no systematic mechanism for citizens or their representatives to challenge contract awards, review supplier performance, or demand competitive re-tendering.
| Dimension | UK | New Zealand | Switzerland | Canada | Singapore | Germany |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Annual HH tax statement | NO | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
| Pre-budget public consultation | NO | YES | YES (referendum) | YES | PARTIAL | YES |
| Constituency-level spending data | NO | YES | YES (canton) | YES | PARTIAL | YES (Land) |
| Independent procurement audit | LIMITED | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
| MP performance reporting | NO | PARTIAL | YES | PARTIAL | YES | PARTIAL |
| Quarterly public dashboards | NO | YES | YES | YES | YES | PARTIAL |
| UK scores 0/6 fully implemented vs average 5.2/6 across comparator nations. Per HH cost of this gap: estimated £3,000–£5,107/year in avoidable waste. | ||||||
Every household in the United Kingdom should receive an annual financial statement — a clear, auditable account of what they contributed, how it was allocated, how their constituency performed relative to the national average, and what share of the national debt falls to them. This is not radical. It is the minimum standard applied to any organisation that manages other people's money.
| Tax Type | National Total (£bn) | Your HH Share | % of Your Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Income Tax (PAYE & Self-Assessment) | £275.0bn | £9,752 | 27.3% |
| National Insurance Contributions | £178.0bn | £6,312 | 17.7% |
| Value Added Tax (VAT) | £172.0bn | £6,099 | 17.1% |
| Council Tax | £44.0bn | £1,560 | 4.4% |
| Corporation Tax (passed through prices) | £88.0bn | £3,121 | 8.7% |
| Fuel Duty | £25.0bn | £887 | 2.5% |
| Alcohol & Tobacco Duty | £22.0bn | £780 | 2.2% |
| Stamp Duty (SDLT) | £14.0bn | £496 | 1.4% |
| Capital Gains Tax | £15.0bn | £532 | 1.5% |
| All Other Taxes & Levies | £174.0bn | £6,170 | 17.2% |
| TOTAL | £1,007.0bn | £35,709 | 100.0% |
| Your household contributes £35,709 per year. This is your investment in the United Kingdom. | |||
| Department / Function | National Spend (£bn) | Your HH Share | % of Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Health & Social Care (DHSC) | £192.0bn | £6,809 | 18.3% |
| Education (DfE) | £114.0bn | £4,043 | 10.9% |
| Defence (MoD) | £58.0bn | £2,057 | 5.5% |
| Welfare & Pensions (DWP) | £286.0bn | £10,142 | 27.3% |
| Transport (DfT) | £42.0bn | £1,489 | 4.0% |
| Home Office & Justice | £48.0bn | £1,702 | 4.6% |
| Debt Interest | £110.0bn | £3,901 | 10.5% |
| All Other Departments | £197.0bn | £6,986 | 18.8% |
| TOTAL MANAGED EXPENDITURE | £1,047.0bn | £37,128 | 100.0% |
| Your household's share of total public spending exceeds your contribution by £1,419/year. This deficit is funded by borrowing added to the national debt. | |||
Total tax contributed by constituency households: £2.68 billion
Total public spending received by constituency: £2.31 billion
Net position: +£370 million (net contributor)
National rank: 142nd of 650 constituencies
Every constituency would receive its own P&L, showing whether it is a net contributor or net recipient. This is not a judgement — it is a fact. Redistribution is a legitimate policy choice, but citizens have the right to see it quantified.
Total UK national debt (PSND): £2.9 trillion (December 2025)
Your household's share: £102,836
Annual interest your household pays on this debt: £3,901
This is more than your household spends on defence (£2,057), transport (£1,489), or the Home Office and courts system (£1,702). Debt interest is now the fourth-largest item of public expenditure, and unlike any other spending line, it delivers no public service.
| Component | Data Source | Update Frequency | Responsible Body | Output | Public Access |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| National tax receipts | HMRC Quarterly Statistics | Quarterly | HMRC / OBR | Revenue by tax type | Open data portal |
| Departmental spending | HMT PESA / OSCAR | Annual + in-year | HM Treasury | Spend by department | Published + machine-readable |
| Constituency allocation | DLUHC / ONS regional accounts | Annual | ONS / New unit | Spend per constituency | Constituency dashboard |
| Household tax profile | HMRC + ONS Living Costs Survey | Annual | HMRC | HH-level estimates | Individualised statement |
| Debt allocation | DMO + OBR Fiscal Risks Report | Monthly (debt), Annual (risk) | DMO / OBR | Per-HH debt + interest | Household statement |
| Integration layer | All above combined | Annual comprehensive | New Transparency Unit | Complete HH statement | Posted + digital portal |
| Estimated cost of Layer 1: £35m/year (£1.24 per household). Every comparable democracy already does this. | |||||
Each of the UK's 650 parliamentary constituencies should have a Constituency Advisory Board (CAB) — a panel of 12–15 qualified, unpaid experts who provide structured financial and operational scrutiny of public spending in their area. This model is drawn from NHS Foundation Trust governance, Academy Trust boards, and private equity portfolio advisory structures.
| Role | Specification | Min. Qualification | Selection Method | Term |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chair | Overall board governance, agenda setting, liaison with MP, public reporting. Casting vote on tied decisions. | 10+ years senior leadership (PLC board, senior civil service, or equivalent). Governance qualification (IoD Cert or equivalent). | Open application, panel interview by independent appointments body. Cannot be a current or former MP. | 3 years, renewable once |
| Finance Lead | Review constituency financial statements, challenge departmental allocations, assess value for money of local spend. | Qualified accountant (ACA, ACCA, CIMA). 7+ years PQE. Experience in public sector or large-scale financial oversight. | Professional body nomination + open application. Vetted by Chair and independent panel. | 3 years, renewable once |
| Legal Lead | Advise on statutory basis of proposals, FOI strategy, procurement law compliance, judicial review pathways. | Qualified solicitor or barrister, 7+ years PQE. Experience in public/administrative law preferred. | Law Society / Bar Council nomination + open application. | 3 years, renewable once |
| Healthcare Lead | Review local NHS trust performance, assess health outcomes vs spend, evaluate commissioning decisions. | Senior clinical or healthcare management experience. 10+ years NHS or equivalent system. | Open application, endorsed by local ICS/ICB. Must declare any NHS employment conflicts. | 3 years, renewable once |
| Education Lead | Review school performance data, SEND provision, further education outcomes, skills gap analysis. | Senior education professional: headteacher, MAT CEO, or FE college principal level. 10+ years experience. | Open application. Cannot currently be employed by a school in the constituency. | 3 years, renewable once |
| Infrastructure Lead | Review local transport, housing, planning, and capital project delivery. Assess infrastructure investment vs outcomes. | Chartered engineer (CEng) or RICS member. 10+ years experience in infrastructure delivery or planning. | Professional body nomination + open application. | 3 years, renewable once |
| Procurement Lead | Lead supplier evaluations, procurement challenge process, contract review. Apply six-category scorecard to major contracts. | MCIPS or equivalent procurement qualification. 7+ years in procurement, preferably public sector or large-scale private sector. | CIPS nomination + open application. Must not hold contracts with any government body in the constituency. | 3 years, renewable once |
| Technology Lead | Review digital service delivery, data infrastructure, cybersecurity posture, technology procurement value for money. | Senior technology leader: CTO/CIO level or equivalent. 10+ years. BCS membership or equivalent. | Open application. Vetted for commercial conflicts with government IT suppliers. | 3 years, renewable once |
| Social Care Lead | Review adult social care provision, children's services, integration with NHS, outcomes vs spend analysis. | Senior social work or social care management: 10+ years. Registered with Social Work England or equivalent. | Open application. Cannot currently be employed by local authority social care in the constituency. | 3 years, renewable once |
| Community Rep 1 | Represent resident perspectives on service delivery, accessibility, local priorities. No professional qualification required. | Resident of constituency for 3+ years. Active community involvement demonstrated through references. | Public ballot from eligible applicants. Lottery element to ensure diversity. | 2 years, renewable once |
| Community Rep 2 | As above, with specific focus on under-represented communities, accessibility, and equalities impact of spending decisions. | Resident of constituency for 3+ years. Demonstrated connection to under-represented community or equalities work. | Public ballot from eligible applicants. Lottery element to ensure diversity. | 2 years, renewable once |
| Community Rep 3 | As above, with specific focus on business and local economy. SME perspective on regulation, procurement access, skills. | Resident of constituency. Owner or senior manager of local SME (under 250 employees) for 3+ years. | Local Chamber of Commerce / FSB nomination + public ballot. | 2 years, renewable once |
| Total: 12 members per board × 650 constituencies = 7,800 expert volunteers nationally. Estimated support cost: £25m/year (£0.89/HH). | ||||
| Governance Element | Requirement | Frequency | Accountability | Precedent | Enforcement |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Meetings | Minimum 6 formal meetings per year, of which 2 must be open to public attendance | Bi-monthly minimum | Minutes published within 14 days | NHS FT Board governance | Commissioner for Standards oversight |
| Conflicts of interest | Full register maintained, published annually. Members must declare and withdraw from relevant decisions. | Ongoing + annual publication | Chair + Legal Lead | Companies Act 2006 s.177 | Removal for undeclared conflicts |
| Reports | Annual constituency report to residents. Quarterly dashboard published online. | Quarterly + Annual | Full board approval required | FTSE 100 annual reporting | Commissioner review if not published |
| MP engagement | MP must attend minimum 4 of 6 meetings. CAB assessment of MP published in annual report. | Per meeting cycle | Attendance recorded and published | Select Committee attendance rules | Non-attendance reported to Speaker |
| Independence | No member may be a member of a political party or have donated >£500 to any party in last 5 years. | Verified at appointment, annually thereafter | Independent Appointments Panel | Judicial Appointments Commission model | Immediate removal if breached |
| Effectiveness review | External evaluation of board effectiveness every 2 years, published in full. | Biennial | Independent evaluator (Big 4 or academic) | UK Corporate Governance Code Principle L | Remedial action plan if deficiencies found |
| Governance standard: equivalent to FTSE 250 board requirements. Cost per household: £0.89/year including secretariat, digital platform, and training. | |||||
Central and local government procurement exceeds £300 billion per year. The NAO has consistently identified 15–30% of this as poor value for money. Layer 3 introduces a structured, six-category procurement scorecard — modelled on private equity due diligence and FTSE 100 vendor management frameworks — that enables Constituency Advisory Boards and the public to challenge underperforming contracts with evidence, not opinion.
| Field | Content | Source | Assessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Contract reference | Unique ID from Contracts Finder / local register | Crown Commercial Service | — |
| Supplier name & structure | Legal entity, parent company, ultimate beneficial owner, registered jurisdiction | Companies House + supplier declaration | Ownership transparency rating |
| Contract value | Total contract value, annual spend, per-unit cost | Published contract + FOI | Benchmarked against 3 comparable contracts |
| Duration & extensions | Original term, extensions granted, total elapsed time, remaining term | Contract register | Extension justification assessed |
| KPI performance | Contractual KPIs vs actual performance, trend over contract life | Performance reports + independent verification | RAG rated: each KPI scored individually |
| Financial health | Supplier credit rating, latest accounts, going concern status | Credit agency + Companies House | Risk categorisation: Low / Medium / High / Critical |
| Six-category score | Weighted composite score across all six categories (A–F) | CAB Procurement Lead assessment | Score out of 100. Below 50 triggers formal challenge |
| Recommendation | Continue / Improve / Re-tender / Terminate | Full CAB vote | Published with reasoning |
| Procurement challenge saving potential: £1,577 per household per year based on NAO 15% mid-range estimate applied to £300bn total procurement. | |||
Democracy does not end at the ballot box. Between elections, citizens have no structured mechanism to express spending priorities, assess their MP's performance against commitments, or influence budget allocations before they are finalised. Layer 4 introduces a formal, evidence-based mandate process that gives taxpayers a voice in how their money is spent — without replacing parliamentary sovereignty.
| Step | Action | Who | Timeline | Output |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Step 1: Information | Annual Household Statement delivered to every household (Layer 1). Citizens see exactly what they contribute and how it is spent at national and constituency level. | Transparency Unit + HMRC | April each year (post financial year end) | 28.2 million household statements |
| Step 2: Review | CAB publishes constituency annual report with performance assessments, procurement evaluations, and spending analysis. Public meetings held. | Constituency Advisory Board | June–July | Constituency Annual Report + 2 public meetings |
| Step 3: Priority Expression | Structured consultation: citizens rank spending priorities from published options. Not a referendum — a preference exercise within fiscal constraints published by OBR. | Citizens via secure digital platform + paper option | October (10 weeks before Budget) | Constituency Mandate: ranked priorities with rationale |
| Step 4: MP Business Plan | MP publishes annual business plan setting out how they will advocate for constituency priorities. CAB assesses plan against mandate and provides published rating. | MP + CAB | September (pre-mandate) + January (post-Budget) | MP Business Plan + CAB Assessment (published) |
| Step 5: Accountability Loop | Post-Budget comparison published: what citizens asked for vs what the Budget delivered. MP's advocacy effectiveness assessed. Results feed into next cycle. | CAB + Transparency Unit | December (within 48 hours of Budget) + Q1 reports | People's Mandate vs Budget comparison document |
| Citizens' Mandate Engine cost: £15m/year (£0.53/HH). Estimated value: improved allocation efficiency saving £800–£1,200/HH through better-targeted spending. | ||||
| Business Plan Section | Content Required | CAB Assessment Criteria | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|
| Constituency priorities | Top 5 priorities identified from People's Mandate exercise, with MP's response to each | Alignment with constituency mandate. Evidence of engagement with CAB analysis. | 1–5 (5 = fully aligned) |
| Legislative focus | Bills the MP intends to support, amend, or oppose, with reasoning linked to constituency impact | Quality of constituency impact analysis. Use of Layer 1 financial data. | 1–5 |
| Procurement advocacy | Specific procurement challenges the MP will raise based on Layer 3 scorecards | Number and quality of procurement interventions. Follow-through on CAB recommendations. | 1–5 |
| Financial targets | Quantified targets for constituency: investment secured, costs challenged, services improved | Specificity, measurability, and ambition of targets. Comparison with prior year delivery. | 1–5 |
| Engagement commitment | Planned attendance at CAB meetings, public meetings, and surgeries. Response time targets. | Comparison with actual attendance in prior year. Constituent satisfaction data. | 1–5 |
| Composite MP score published annually: sum of 5 categories = /25. National ranking published. Below 15/25 triggers formal CAB concern notice. | |||
Every FTSE 100 company publishes quarterly results. Every NHS Trust publishes board papers monthly. Every Academy Trust publishes performance data termly. Government departments publish almost nothing at constituency level between annual accounts. Layer 5 introduces quarterly performance reporting modelled on corporate governance standards, with RAG-rated dashboards accessible to every citizen.
| Section | Content | Corporate Governance Equivalent | RAG Rating |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Financial Summary | Constituency spend vs budget YTD. Variance analysis by department. Per-HH cost update. Forecast for remainder of year. | P&L statement + management accounts | GREEN ≤2% variance / AMBER 2–5% / RED >5% |
| 2. Health Outcomes | A&E wait times, GP access, elective surgery backlog, mental health referral times. Benchmarked vs national and regional averages. | Operational KPI dashboard | GREEN above national avg / AMBER within 10% / RED >10% below |
| 3. Education Performance | School results, SEND placement rates, exclusion data, FE outcomes. Progress vs prior year and national benchmarks. | Divisional performance review | GREEN improving / AMBER static / RED declining |
| 4. Infrastructure & Housing | Housing completions vs targets, planning application turnaround, road condition index, broadband coverage. | Capital projects dashboard | GREEN on track / AMBER delayed / RED significantly behind |
| 5. Crime & Justice | Crime rates by category, detection rates, court backlog, antisocial behaviour trends. Compared to prior year and national. | Risk register + compliance report | GREEN improving / AMBER stable / RED deteriorating |
| 6. Procurement Update | Contract performance summaries for top 10 contracts by value. Layer 3 scorecard updates. New contracts awarded with rationale. | Vendor management review | GREEN >70/100 / AMBER 50–70 / RED <50 |
| 7. MP Activity Report | Parliamentary votes, committee attendance, written questions, constituency surgery attendance, CAB meeting attendance. | Board member contribution assessment | GREEN above median / AMBER within 20% / RED >20% below median |
| 8. Citizens' Mandate Tracker | Progress against constituency mandate priorities. Budget allocation vs citizen preferences. Action log of MP advocacy. | Shareholder resolution tracker | GREEN on track / AMBER partial progress / RED no progress |
| Layer 5 cost: £15m/year (£0.53/HH). Estimated value: performance management pressure drives £2,200/HH in improved outcomes (IFS/OECD evidence). | |||
This proposal is designed for phased implementation, starting with a 20-constituency pilot and scaling nationally over four years. Each phase has clear deliverables, legal basis, costed budgets, and measurable per-household impact. The implementation model follows HM Treasury Green Book appraisal methodology.
| Phase | Timeline | Key Activities | Legal Basis | Cost | Per-HH Impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phase 0: Foundation | Q2 2026 – Q4 2026 (6 months) | Establish Transparency Unit within Cabinet Office. Appoint Commissioner for Democratic Finance. Design household statement template. Build digital platform MVP. Recruit pilot CAB members. | Machinery of Government change (no primary legislation required). Royal prerogative for Commissioner appointment. Existing data-sharing provisions under Digital Economy Act 2017. | £12m setup + £5m/year running | No direct saving. Infrastructure investment. |
| Phase 1: Pilot | Q1 2027 – Q4 2027 (12 months) | Launch 20 pilot constituencies (geographically, demographically, politically diverse). First household statements issued. 20 CABs operational. First procurement scorecards published. First quarterly performance reports. | As Phase 0. Pilot constituencies selected by independent panel. Voluntary MP participation (with published opt-out reasons). | £25m/year (pilot scale) | £500–£800/HH in pilot areas (conservative, based on procurement challenge alone) |
| Phase 2: Scale | Q1 2028 – Q4 2028 (12 months) | Expand to 200 constituencies. Refine models based on pilot evidence. Citizens' Mandate Engine fully operational. MP Business Plans published nationally. National procurement scorecard database launched. | New primary legislation: Democratic Accountability Act. Statutory duty on departments to provide constituency-level data. FOI reform to include proactive publication requirement. | £55m/year (scaled) | £1,500–£2,500/HH in participating areas |
| Phase 3: National | Q1 2029 – Q4 2029 (12 months) | All 650 constituencies operational. Full digital platform. National procurement challenge database. Annual People's Mandate integrated into Budget process. Quarterly reports for every constituency. | Democratic Accountability Act fully in force. Standing Orders amended for People's Mandate consideration. OBR given statutory duty to model constituency impacts. | £90m/year (full national operation) | £3,000–£5,107/HH nationally |
| Total national cost at full operation: £90m/year = £3.19/HH. Total estimated benefit: £3,000–£5,107/HH. ROI: 940:1 to 1,601:1. | |||||
The following is a draft submission letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Cabinet Office, and the Public Accounts Committee. It sets out five specific, actionable requests with legal basis for each.
Re: Public Interest Proposal — The People's Budget Framework & Constituency Advisory Model
Reference: BNU-005-DEM-2026
Dear Chancellor,
We write to submit a formal public interest proposal for the introduction of a People's Budget Framework, comprising five interlocking layers of democratic financial governance designed to rebuild the connection between citizens, their elected representatives, and the £1.2 trillion spent annually in their name.
This proposal is non-partisan, evidence-based, and modelled on governance standards routinely applied in private equity, FTSE 100 board governance, and comparable democracies including New Zealand, Canada, and Switzerland. It does not seek to replace parliamentary sovereignty, create a veto mechanism, or introduce binding referenda on fiscal policy.
We make five specific requests:
We request a meeting with relevant officials to discuss this proposal at the earliest opportunity. We are willing to present to the Public Accounts Committee, the Treasury Select Committee, or any relevant departmental team.
This proposal is published simultaneously as a public document. We believe that fiscal transparency is a matter of public interest that benefits from open discourse.
This is the centrepiece of the proposal. It replaces the current closed, top-down Budget process with a transparent, structured 12-month cycle that gives citizens meaningful input without compromising parliamentary sovereignty or market-sensitive fiscal decisions.
| Month | Stage | Who Acts | What Happens | Output | Public Access |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| April | Accounts & Statements | HMRC, ONS, Transparency Unit | Financial year closes (31 March). Household statements compiled using HMRC tax data, departmental spend data, and ONS constituency allocations. Posted to every household and published on digital portal. | 28.2m household financial statements. 650 constituency accounts published. | Full. Every household receives personalised statement. All constituency accounts published as open data. |
| May | Departmental Performance Reviews | NAO, Departments, OBR | Each government department publishes annual performance report with constituency-level breakdowns. NAO publishes departmental value-for-money assessments. OBR publishes fiscal outturn analysis. | Departmental annual reports (constituency-level). NAO VFM reports. OBR fiscal outturn. | Full. Published on central portal. Machine-readable data for all constituency dashboards. |
| June | CAB Review Cycle | 650 Constituency Advisory Boards | CABs convene to review constituency accounts, departmental performance data, and prior year procurement scorecards. Each CAB holds minimum one public meeting. CABs identify priority areas for investigation. | CAB preliminary assessment reports (650 constituencies). Public meeting minutes published. | Full. Public meetings open to all residents. Reports published within 14 days. |
| July | Procurement Challenge | CAB Procurement Leads, Crown Commercial Service | Supplier evaluations completed for all contracts >£10m. Six-category scorecards published. Underperforming contracts (<50/100) subject to formal challenge process. Re-tendering recommendations made. | National Procurement Scorecard Database updated. Challenge notices issued. Re-tendering recommendations. | Full. Scorecard database searchable by constituency, department, supplier, and score. |
| August | Fiscal Sustainability | OBR | OBR publishes Fiscal Sustainability Report including long-term debt projections, demographic pressures, and per-household debt trajectory. CABs incorporate into constituency analysis. | OBR Fiscal Sustainability Report. Per-HH debt update. | Full. Published with plain-English summary and constituency-level implications. |
| September | Draft Spending Priorities | HM Treasury, Cabinet Office | NEW — GOVERNMENT PUBLISHES DRAFT SPENDING PRIORITIES a minimum of 10 weeks before Budget Day. Not a draft Budget (no market-sensitive tax rates or specific allocations), but a statement of strategic priorities, departmental spending direction, and policy intent. Published alongside OBR assessment of fiscal headroom. | Draft Spending Priorities document. OBR fiscal headroom assessment. Constituency impact modelling. | Full. Published as consultation document. 10-week consultation window opens. |
| October | Citizens' Mandate Exercise | Citizens, CABs, Transparency Unit | Structured preference exercise in every constituency. Citizens rank spending priorities from published options, within fiscal constraints set by OBR. Public meetings held by every CAB (minimum 2). Digital and paper participation options. Results aggregated at constituency and national level. | 650 Constituency Mandates. National People's Mandate (aggregated). Participation rates published. | Full. Every citizen can participate. Results published within 14 days of close. |
| November | Government Response | HM Treasury, Departments | Government publishes formal response to the People's Mandate within 21 days. Must address each of the top 5 national priorities and explain how the Budget addresses or departs from them, with reasoning. | Government Response to People's Mandate document. Published with full Treasury modelling. | Full. Tabled in Parliament. Published on gov.uk and constituency dashboards. |
| Nov/Dec | BUDGET DAY | Chancellor, HM Treasury, OBR | Budget delivered in Parliament. Within 48 hours, Transparency Unit publishes side-by-side comparison: what the People's Mandate asked for vs what the Budget delivers. Constituency impact assessments published for all 650 constituencies within 7 days. | Budget documents (as current). People's Mandate Comparison Report (NEW). 650 Constituency Impact Assessments (NEW). | Full. Comparison report designed for public comprehension. Per-HH impact published for every constituency. |
| Jan–March | Finance Bill & Accountability | Parliament, CABs, Transparency Unit | Finance Bill progresses through Parliament. CABs publish constituency impact assessments. Q1 quarterly performance reports published (Layer 5). MPs publish updated business plans reflecting Budget outcomes. CABs issue Q1 mandate tracker reports. | Finance Act. Q1 Quarterly Reports (650 constituencies). MP Business Plan updates. Q1 Mandate Tracker. | Full. All reports published. Public meetings held by CABs to discuss constituency impacts. |
| Complete 12-month cycle cost: £90m/year = £3.19 per household. This represents 0.0086% of total public spending. | |||||
| Dimension | Current Process | Proposed Process |
|---|---|---|
| Citizen financial information | None. Citizens receive no itemised statement of their contributions or how they are spent. | Annual household statement showing contributions by tax type, allocations by department, constituency P&L, and debt share. |
| Pre-Budget consultation | None. Budget prepared in secret by Treasury and Chancellor. First public sight is Budget Day speech. | Draft spending priorities published 10 weeks before Budget. Structured consultation through Citizens' Mandate Exercise. |
| Procurement oversight | Limited. NAO audits published retrospectively. No systematic public scorecard. No challenge mechanism for citizens. | Six-category scorecard for every contract >£10m. Searchable national database. Formal challenge process via CABs. |
| MP accountability | Elections every 5 years. No structured performance reporting. No business plan requirement. No attendance metrics published. | Annual MP business plan. CAB assessment published. Quarterly activity reports. Attendance metrics. Mandate alignment score. |
| Constituency-level data | Almost non-existent. Departmental accounts are national. No constituency P&L. No local performance dashboards. | Full constituency accounts. Quarterly RAG-rated dashboards. Constituency impact assessments for every Budget measure. |
| Post-Budget accountability | Finance Bill debate (limited scrutiny time). No systematic comparison of promises vs delivery at constituency level. | 48-hour People's Mandate comparison. 7-day constituency impact assessments. Quarterly performance tracking against Budget commitments. |
| Every dimension moves from zero or minimal citizen involvement to structured, evidence-based participation. This is what every comparable democracy already does. | ||
| Metric | National Total | Per Household | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total cost of framework (full national operation) | £90 million/year | £3.19/year | BNU implementation model, costed against comparable programmes |
| Procurement challenge savings (Layer 3) | £44.5 billion/year | £1,577/year | NAO 15% mid-estimate on £300bn procurement |
| Performance management improvement (Layer 5) | £62.0 billion/year | £2,200/year | IFS/OECD benchmarks on outcome-based governance |
| Transparency & fraud reduction (Layers 1–2) | £37.5 billion/year | £1,330/year | NAO fraud estimates + OECD open-budget evidence |
| Total estimated benefit | £144.0 billion/year | ~£5,107/year | Combined Layers 1–5 |
| Cost per household | £90m total | £3.19/year (~£0.27/month) | Full national operation |
| Benefit per household | £84.6bn–£144.0bn | £3,000–£5,107/year | Conservative to mid-range estimate |
| Net benefit per household | — | £2,997–£5,104/year | Benefit minus cost |
| Return on investment | — | 900:1 | Conservative estimate |
| # | Source | Publication | Used For |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | National Audit Office | Government procurement: the scale and nature of contracting in the UK (2024); Fraud and Error in Government Spending (2023) | Procurement savings estimates (15–30%); fraud/waste quantification; £300bn procurement baseline |
| 2 | Institute for Fiscal Studies | The IFS Green Budget (2025); Public spending and outcomes (2024) | Performance management savings estimates; departmental spending breakdowns; outcome benchmarking |
| 3 | Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development | OECD Budget Transparency Toolkit (2024); Open Government Data Report (2023) | International comparison framework; open-budget evidence base; transparency saving estimates |
| 4 | Office for Budget Responsibility | Economic and Fiscal Outlook (March 2026); Fiscal Risks and Sustainability (2024) | National debt figures; per-HH debt calculations; fiscal headroom methodology; interest cost data |
| 5 | HM Revenue & Customs | HMRC Tax Receipts and National Insurance Contributions (Monthly/Annual) | Tax revenue by type; household contribution calculations; income tax/NIC/VAT breakdowns |
| 6 | HM Treasury | Public Expenditure Statistical Analyses (PESA) (2025); Country and Regional Analysis (2025) | Departmental spending allocations; regional/constituency spending estimates; total managed expenditure |
| 7 | Office for National Statistics | Households Below Average Income (2025); Regional Economic Activity (2025); Household estimates (2025) | 28.2m household count; regional economic data; constituency demographic baselines |
| 8 | New Zealand Treasury | Budget Policy Statement (2025); Financial Statements of the Government (2025) | Pre-Budget consultation precedent; household financial statement model; transparency framework |
| 9 | UK Corporate Governance Code | Financial Reporting Council: UK Corporate Governance Code (2024 revision) | Board governance standards; quarterly reporting requirements; effectiveness review methodology |
| 10 | Procurement Act 2023 | Procurement Act 2023 (c.54); Cabinet Office implementation guidance (2024–2025) | Legal basis for procurement transparency requirements; contract performance provisions (s.71); transparency notices (s.53) |
Methodology note: Per-household calculations throughout this document use the ONS estimate of 28.2 million UK households (2025). Tax revenue and spending figures are drawn from HMRC and HMT published data for 2025/26. Where estimates are used (e.g., constituency-level allocations), methodology is detailed in the relevant section. Savings estimates represent modelled projections based on international evidence and are not guaranteed outcomes. Conservative estimates use the lower bound of published ranges; mid-range estimates use the midpoint.
Acknowledgements: This proposal draws on published work by the NAO, IFS, OBR, OECD, and academic researchers cited above. Britain Needs Us is an independent public interest research organisation. This document has not been commissioned, endorsed, or funded by any government body, political party, or commercial organisation.