Why The Current Government Is Holding So Many Consultations And What Is The Cost

14th January 2026

There are several real, strategic, and political reasons why the Labour government has been issuing a high volume of consultations instead of immediately implementing policies.

Complexity of Modern Policy Problems

Many of today's policy areas — AI regulation, digital identity, data privacy, employment law, cost of living strategies, climate adaptation schemes. These involve complex trade‑offs and uncertain impacts. Ministers and officials often use consultations to gather evidence from experts, businesses, civil society and the public before making final decisions because:

There are no easy answers to these issues.

Policymakers need to understand unintended consequences.

The problems cross sector boundaries (e.g., technology law affects privacy, security, and innovation).

In short, policy complexity has grown since the decades when governments could act more unilaterally, and consultations are a tool for reducing uncertainty.

Legal and Regulatory Requirements

In some areas, the government is legally required to consult before introducing secondary legislation or regulations. For example:

Changes to certain public services or regulatory frameworks (communications, employment, health, data regulation) require formal consultations under statutory guidance.

For major infrastructure and environmental policy, statutory public consultation is a legal prerequisite.

Thus, consultations are sometimes not a choice but a legal obligation.

Internal and Coalition Management

Although Labour has a majority, its parliamentary party contains a wide spectrum of views — from moderate social democrats to traditional union‑aligned figures. Consultations can help:

Build internal consensus by letting different wings of the party input.

Identify contested issues early so ministers can work on framing or compromise.

Mitigate rebellions by showing MPs that the government sought wide input.

In past eras, governments often had tighter ideological coherence or stronger discipline, so fewer consultations were needed before action. Today’s Labour party is broader and more diverse, so consultation helps manage internal politics.

Avoiding Unpopular Surprises

Modern political communication — 24/7 news, social media, activist campaigns — means that policy announcements are instantly scrutinised and can generate backlash quickly.

Consultations serve as a way of testing waters:

Will business groups push back?

Will voters find a policy confusing?

Are civil liberties groups going to litigate?

Rather than suffer a damaging reversal after rollout (a U‑turn), the government often consults first to reduce risk.

This tactic is practical but it looks slow compared with decisive single‑announcement governance styles of the past.

Why It Seems Consultations Are Excessive

Short Political Memory

In the 1980s-90s, governments often did dramatic policy shifts with limited consultation:

Major privatisations.

Welfare reform without extended public review.

Deregulation efforts.

That style was efficient — but also often polarising or rushed. Modern governments (including Labour’s) are mindful of:

Litigation risks.

Digital scrutiny.

Consumer protection standards.

So they consult — longer and more often — to anticipate and mitigate risks.

Consultations Are Sometimes Used as Delay Tactics

Critics argue that some consultations are not genuinely about gathering input — but delaying decision‑making until pressure dies down or until political costs diminish. This can happen when a government:

Is uncertain internally about the best policy.

Wants to avoid backlash from media, unions, or activists.

Is unsure how the policy fits within its manifesto promises.

Whether intentional or not, consultations can be used defensively.

Consultation Fatigue vs. Action

Some people perceive too many consultations as inaction or indecision. This is partly because consultations:

Generate the appearance of activity without visible results.

Create long lead times before policy implementation.

Often result in watered‑down policies.

By contrast, direct action — as seen with some past governments — produces immediate and visible outcomes.

Why the Government Doesn’t Just "Get On With It" Like in the Past

Higher Standards of Evidence and Accountability

Today’s governance expects:

Impact assessments.

Equality and human‑rights reviews.

Environmental and economic modelling.

These require consultation to gather data and stakeholder evidence.

In earlier political eras, governments often acted first and assessed later — a model less acceptable today.

Legal Safeguards and Devolved Powers

Particularly in areas touching on devolved administrations (Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland) or EU‑derived rights frameworks, consultations are necessary to:

Comply with legal obligations.

Coordinate across jurisdictions.

Avoid judicial review.

This reduces the space for unilateral, fast‑track decision‑making.

Electoral Caution

Labour wants to avoid the political cost of mis‑steps:

Policies perceived as unfair or poorly designed can hurt the party at the polls.

Consultations offer a political buffer — “we’re considering all views before action”.

While that reduces risk, it also slows decision timelines.

So Is Labour Consulting Too Much?

There are two contrasting interpretations:

Supporters Would Say:

Consultations are necessary for rigorous, evidence‑based policy.

They help ensure policies work, are enforceable, and respect rights.

They build legitimacy and avoid costly reversals later.

Critics Would Say:

The government is over‑consulting as a way to avoid making hard decisions.

This creates policy paralysis and undermines confidence in leadership.

Voters expect action, not endless question periods.

The truth lies somewhere in between: consultations have become a normal part of modern governance, but overuse — especially when combined with a lack of visible follow‑through — fuels the perception of hesitation or indecision.

In Summary
Reason Why It Requires Consultation

Complex modern policy issues
Need evidence and expert input

Legal/regulatory obligations
Some policies must be consulted by law

Political management
Builds internal consensus and mitigates rebellion

Risk aversion
Tests public and stakeholder reaction

Modern accountability standards Demands impact assessments and rights analyses

Finally
Labour’s extensive use of consultations reflects both the complexity and accountability expectations of modern government, and a political calculation to avoid backlash or costly U‑turns. While consultations are valuable, over‑reliance without follow‑through can create the impression of inaction.

What do all these consultations cost the taxpayer

Direct Costs of Running Consultations

Unlike headline government spending (e.g., benefits or NHS), there’s no single official total published for how much the UK government spends on all consultations each year. However, we do have some useful guideposts:

a) Per‑Consultation Costs (Small‑Scale Examples)

Public bodies sometimes publish the actual cost of individual consultations. For example, Scottish Government Freedom of Information responses show real spend on routine policy consultations with concrete figures, such as:

£43,326 on a consultation about housing accessibility

£35,156 on consultations about council tax and business rates

£17,059–£27,835 on building and planning consultations

Smaller exercises ranging £435 to £22,949 on narrower policy questions

These reflect direct administrative and publication costs, excluding staff time involved in planning, processing responses, analysing feedback and writing policy proposals.

Large, complex consultations — especially those with mass public response — can cost far more. Guidance suggests that a major consultation with extensive outreach, events, analysis, and publication could run up to £100,000 or more once all services are procured externally, while smaller efforts could be £6,000–£10,000 each.

Total Government Consultation Activity

While direct costs per exercise are published in some FOI responses, there’s no consolidated figure for all consultations’ total cost across Whitehall, partly because:

Many consultations are handled in‑house by civil servants, so there is no line item for external spend.

Costs are often embedded in departmental budgets and not broken out separately.

Complexity varies hugely — from targeted stakeholder calls to nationwide public comment windows.

That said, wider estimates help frame the scale:

500 Consultations a Year?

Reports indicate the UK government runs around 500 public consultations annually. AI trials suggest that government seeks to cut £20 million in costs per year by using AI tools like Consult to analyse responses instead of manual processing.

Using that estimate:

£20 million saved suggests the baseline cost (staffing, analysis and overhead) of consultations is significantly higher currently.

If 500 consultations cost around £20 million to streamline analysis alone, total costs including design, outreach, events, legal checks and reporting could easily be much higher — possibly in the low to mid‑tens of millions annually, and that’s before factoring staff time.

This gives a sense of scale: consultations aren’t trivial, but they are not in the hundreds of millions by themselves.

Related Public Process Costs Are Much Bigger — Public Inquiries

By contrast, public inquiries — often confused with consultations — can be enormously expensive. These are formal investigations, usually statutory, that gather evidence, testimony, and public input.

The high‑profile UK Covid Inquiry is expected to exceed £200 million–£230 million in costs, including:

The inquiry’s own running costs (meetings, witnesses, analysis): approaching £192 million so far.

Government spending to respond (staffing, legal teams): another £100 million+.

This is separate from consultation processes, but illustrates just how costly formal public participation mechanisms can get when amplified by duration, legal complexity, and breadth.

Why Consultation Costs Matter

Transparency and Legitimacy

Consultations help the government gauge expert and public views before acting — but they cost money and time, and taxpayers expect a clear benefit from them.

Hidden Staff Time

Published costs often exclude civil service salaries for policy teams who design consultations, read responses, and write reports. When this labour is included, the true cost is much higher than the £6k–£100k figures usually quoted.

Efficiency Pressures

The UK government is actively trying to cut costs:

It has pledged to halve consultancy spending by 2028‑29 to save the taxpayer over £1.2 billion relative to earlier trends.

New AI tools like Consult are projected to save £20 million a year by speeding analysis and freeing tens of thousands of staff hours.

This suggests a recognition that traditional consultation processes are resource‑intensive.

Key Takeaways

Direct costs for individual consultations are often in the £5,000–£50,000 range, with larger or more complex ones reaching six figures when external analysis and events are included.

Government may run hundreds of consultations each year, implying cumulative costs in the tens of millions (before internal staff time).

Public inquiries — a different category — can cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of pounds.

AI tools are being introduced to cut consultation costs and administrative burden.

Final Perspective
While there is no single published total for all consultation costs, available data and pilot estimates strongly suggest that consultations are a significant but not astronomical cost centre — often much smaller than major statutory inquiries or large outsourcing/consultancy contracts.