With the government having commissioned a spate of reviews since taking office, Alex Walker explains what a review is, why governments use them, and what reviews have been launched so far.
What is a government policy review?
Reviews are established by the government to examine how a particular area of policy is functioning and, if there are found to be problems, look at ways of improving it. Perhaps surprisingly given their proliferation, there is no set rubric for policy reviews. Reviews take different forms depending on the context and aims of the commissioning minister, who will set their terms of reference accordingly. But some of their main features are as follows.
The terms of reference for the review, specifying its scope and purpose, are set by the government. Often, a particular high-profile individual with relevant expertise will be appointed by the government to lead it, sometimes supported by an expert panel.
Reviews often engage in some form of evidence-taking, typically involving a call for evidence and a public consultation. However, this is not always the case depending on the timeframe the reviewers have been given. For example, the recent review of NHS performance, led by Lord Darzi, did not involve a public consultation ‘given the speed of the investigation and assessment’. The outcome of the review is usually published in the form of a report, which the government then responds to.
Reviews are often referred to as ‘independent’, meaning that they will be able to come to their own conclusions within the terms of reference without interference from the commissioning department(s). However, officials are often still involved in supporting the work of the review.
The government can also conduct ‘internal’ reviews within or across departments that may not involve an external figure or panel. A good example is the recently launched pensions review, commissioned by the Treasury but led by the Minister for Pensions.
Why do governments commission reviews?
Governments commission reviews for several different reasons. They can be a response to specific perceived failings in an area, with a review one way of signalling that the government is gripping the problem and intends to fix it. The recently announced review of the water sector, an apparent response to longstanding failings in the regulation of water companies, might be seen as falling into this category.
Reviews can also shed new light on an issue by bringing in the perspectives of external experts, key stakeholders and – depending on how extensive their engagement is – the wider public. A figure from outside government with considerable experience and expertise might be able to come at the problem from a different angle and generate new ideas for change.
Independent reviews can also help create the impression that the government is taking a non-ideological, evidence-based approach. Sometimes ministers choose to highlight this by appointing someone from a different political party or political background to lead the review, as the Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood has done in appointing one of her Conservative predecessors – David Gauke – to lead the government’s sentencing review.
Furthermore, policy reviews can be a useful way of creating a broader contextual argument for change in an area, one that might command greater consensus and therefore have more of a chance of success and longevity.
Yet government reviews are not without their critics. They can be seen as a way of avoiding decisions. In the end, protracted policy problems usually require a political call to be made – one which will involve winners and losers. A review might be a way of deferring this decision or creating cover for a predetermined course of action. Similarly, they can be criticised as a technocratic way of doing policymaking that assumes there is a correct solution that can be arrived at if the right process is followed.
It is also worth noting that despite the frequency with which reviews are commissioned by governments there has been little wider evaluation of what issues reviews work best on and what form of review produces the most useful results in different contexts.
Did the last government commission many reviews?
Government reviews are not a new phenomenon, and the Labour government’s Conservative predecessors also commissioned them. Recent reviews commissioned by previous administrations include the independent review of the Investigatory Powers Act 2026, conducted by Lord Anderson (2023), the Independent Review of Net Zero, chaired by Chris Skidmore (2023), the independent review of integrated care systems, conducted by Patricia Hewitt (2023), and the Independent Review on the Economics of Biodiversity, led by Professor Partha Dasgupta (2021).
What reviews were promised in Labour’s manifesto?
The Labour Party’s 2024 manifesto promised to review 14 different areas of policy. The most prominent of these were:
A Strategic Defence review (within the first year)
A review of the pensions landscape
A review of sentencing
A strategic review of probation governance
An expert-led review of curriculum and assessment
However, Labour also pledged to review:
The increased right to buy discounts introduced in 2012
The governance arrangements for Combined Authorities
Universal Credit
The Mineworkers’ Pension Scheme
How to better protect leaseholders from the costs of improving building safety
The parental leave system
Safeguarding, attendance and off-rolling in schools
The way bursaries are allocated and the structure of retention payments for new teachers
The post-government employment rules
What reviews have been established so far?
Of these, several have now been established.
The Strategic Defence Review was launched on 16 July. Its stated purpose is determining ‘the roles, capabilities and reforms required by UK Defence to meet the challenges, threats and opportunities of the twenty-first century’. The Defence Secretary, John Healey, is overseeing the review which is being headed by three external reviewers – Lord Robertson of Port Ellen, with General Sir Richard Barrons and Dr Fiona Hill. It is due to give recommendations in the first half of 2025.
The Secretary of State for Education Bridget Phillipson launched a Curriculum and Assessment Review on 19 July to look at ‘the key challenges to attainment for young people, and the barriers which hold children back from the opportunities and life chances they deserve’. It is being led by Professor Becky Francis, supported by an expert group of individuals with experience of the education system. It is set to publish an interim report in early 2025 and a final report in autumn 2025 with recommendations.
The terms of reference for the government’s pensions review were published on 16 August. It is aimed at boosting investment, increasing saver returns and tackling waste in the pensions system. A joint review between the Treasury and the Department for Work and Pensions, it is being led by Pensions Minister Emma Reynolds.
In September, the Ministry for Housing Communities and Local Government confirmed that it is reviewing the Right to Buy scheme, but has no plans to abolish it, with a consultation to be announced in the autumn.
The Independent Sentencing Review was established on 21 October, with former Conservative Lord Chancellor David Gauke appointed as the chair. This coincided with a second round of prisoners being released early due to capacity pressures. The review is tasked ‘with a comprehensive re-evaluation of our sentencing framework’ to ‘ensure we are never again in a position where the country has more prisoners than places’.
What other reviews have been commissioned?
There are several reviews that were not specifically mentioned in Labour’s 2024 manifesto that have also been established since the party took office.
On 9 September the Foreign Secretary David Lammy launched three new reviews led by three different external experts to examine:
(1) the UK’s global impact, led by Professor Ngaire Woods;
(2) the UK’s approach to development, led by Baroness Minouche Shafik; and
(3) the UK’s economic diplomacy, led by Sir Martin Donnelly.
The reviewers will act independently of government but be supported by officials in carrying out the work of their reviews.
The Home Secretary Yvette Cooper wrote to the chair of the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) on 10 September to commission a review by the MAC of the financial requirements for family visas – in particular, the previous government’s proposal to increase the Minimum Income Requirement.
Additionally, on 15 October, the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra) announced that the economist Dan Corry would lead an internal review into whether the regulatory landscape under Defra was fit for purpose and develop recommendations for changes that would drive growth while protecting the environment.
A week later, Defra, along with the Welsh government, launched a major review of the water sector which ‘will report back next year with recommendations to the government on how to tackle inherited systemic issues in the water sector’. It will be chaired by former Deputy Governor of the Bank of England, Jon Cunliffe, supported by an expert panel.
And, on 20 October, Transport Secretary Louise Haigh announced a review into the oversight of major transport infrastructure projects, driven by failures in the management of HS2. This is not the first HS2-related review, with the Oakervee Review having reported under Boris Johnson on whether and how to proceed with the high-speed rail link at the start of 2020.
What reviews have reported so far?
On taking office, the Health Secretary Wes Streeting commissioned ‘an immediate and independent investigation of the NHS’, led by Lord Darzi. It was tasked with examining the current performance of the NHS in England and setting out the challenges facing the healthcare system.
The 163-page report (with a 331-page accompanying technical annex) was published on 12 September and assessed patient access to healthcare, the quality of the healthcare being provided, and the overall performance of the health system. The reported concluded that the NHS is in ‘serious trouble’ with access to NHS services poor and the quality of care mixed. Darzi set out a list of themes to be drawn upon in the forthcoming 10-year plan.
David Lammy also commissioned a review on taking office – an internal assessment of Israel’s compliance with international law. The internal assessment concluded there was a risk that certain military exports to Israel might be used in violation of international humanitarian law and, on this basis, the government suspended 30 arms export licences.
And after the election, the Chancellor Rachel Reeves commissioned a ‘rapid’ review by Treasury officials of the state of public spending. She presented the findings to Parliament on 29 July, highlighting a forecast departmental overspend of £21.9 billion.
By Alex Walker, Research & Communications Officer, UK in a Changing Europe.