The scathing and eloquent attack on the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) by the Bar Council this week raises a serious issue in the world of procurement.
The Bar angrily dispute the CPS's claim it saved £17.1 million by bringing lawyer services in house, calling it "Alice in Wonderland accounting". The CPS argues its savings are robust and independently ratified, but the clash calls into question the very notion of reporting savings.
I'm used to hearing cost reduction figures bandied around in press releases and interviews, but they are rarely questioned. I'm sure most of these savings are traceable and accountable. Cashable figures, not cost avoidance. But, just like the CPS, we can all been accused of over egging the pudding at times.
How do you make sure your savings figures stand up to scrutiny?