The Treasury and Work and Pensions Committees are today urging
the governors of the Motability charity to “stop making excuses”,
provide full evidence to the committees’ ongoing
investigations and fully implement the NAO’s calls for
reforms to the scheme’s financial management.
Correspondence published today centres on evidence submitted by
Motability to the Committees—the NAO has confirmed that
Motability had no grounds for redacting part of it—concerning the
levels of state aid and financial management at the organisation
that leases cars to disabled people in return for part of their
PIP benefit.
The National Audit Office (NAO) report last year on the
Motability scheme raised significant concerns about the
governance of the scheme, which the committees have said
“operates as a monopoly” but still benefits from generous tax
reliefs (maximum value estimated at £888m in 2017) and support
from the Government that isn’t available to the vast majority of
private companies. ’s rejoinder to the
committees’ investigations openly attempts to discredit the NAO’s
valuation of tax reliefs benefiting the scheme, despite the
charity governors and Motability Operations having agreed them
before publication.
A joint report by the committees last year found
that Motability "badly needs a
new roadmap" for its finances. The NAO report exposed
the full extent of a planned bonus for the Chief Executive
which branded “obscene”, adding
“despite a joint select committee inquiry earlier this year, this
is the first time these figures have been out in the open.
Motability Operations now has serious questions to answer about
the information they provided to Parliament. With reserves on
this scale, and the cutting of executive rewards long overdue,
there is now huge scope to improve the lives of hosts of disabled
claimants without asking taxpayers for a penny more.” The
Chief Executive has since announced he will stand down next
year.
The latest evidence suggests Motability is still not taking the
NAO or the committees seriously. The governors of Motability
failed to provide full details of the recommendations of their
internal governance review, attempting instead to hide behind
“commercial sensitivity”. The NAO has confirmed no such exemption
applies to those recommendations and the committees have
instructed Motability to provide the full unredacted information.
The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions echoes these concerns, stating
that the NAO, the two committees and the Charity Commission have
given the Government a “clear understanding of how the scheme
operates today …and the steps Motability need to take …we will
ask them to be transparent in implementing the NAO’s
recommendations and in assisting your committees.”
Rt Hon MP, Chair of the Work and
Pensions Committee, said: “We are clear, the NAO is
clear, the Government is clear: Motability must step up, now, and
demonstrate the transparency and accountability befitting an
organisation that enjoys huge amounts of taxpayer’s support. Stop
making excuses, start channelling all your vast resources into
what Motability does best: giving freedom and mobility to so many
disabled people.”
Rt Hon MP, Chair of the Treasury
Committee, said: "Sunlight is the best
disinfectant. So it's extremely disappointing that Motability is
refusing to provide our committees with the evidence that we have
requested.
"We will continue to push for full disclosure to ensure that
disabled people are provided with the best possible
support."/ENDS
Links below will also publish at midnight:
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmworpen/Correspondence/Chairs_to_FST_on_tax_reliefs.pdf -
This is actually to FST
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmworpen/Correspondence/Lord_Sterling_to_Chairs_on_tax_reliefs.pdf -
this is ’s explanation of how
£0.88bn in 2017 is not a fair measure of the state aid Motability
receives, among other reasons because if it were not provided to
Motability, disabled people would spend their PIP on other
non-taxed things. (NB his example of “food” might not strictly
qualify as what the mobility component of PIP awards is for,
although of course disabled people are free to spend their
benefit as they need, and you might, for example, need to spend
more on pre-prepared food because of your reduced mobility)
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmworpen/Correspondence/Lord-Sterling-to-FST-cc-Chairs-on-tax-reliefs.pdf
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmworpen/Correspondence/Chairs-to-NAO-on-tax-reliefs.pdf
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmworpen/Correspondence/NAO-to-Chairs-on-tax-reliefs.pdf
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmworpen/Correspondence/Chairs-to-NAO-on-Motability-internal-governance-review.pdf
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmworpen/Correspondence/NAO-to-Chairs-on-Motability-internal-governance-review.pdf
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmworpen/Correspondence/Chairs-to-SofS-on-Govt-support-for-Motability.pdf
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmworpen/Correspondence/SofS-to-Chairs-on-Govt-support-for-Motability.pdf
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmworpen/Correspondence/190212-FF-NM-to-Lord-Sterling-re-governance-review.pdf
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmworpen/Correspondence/190212-FF-N-to-SoS-re-Motability-review.pdf
