The UK Government is making a sizeable investment in the skills of its own workforce — and two Big Four firms will play a central role.
KPMG and EY have been selected to deliver a civil service training programme with a combined potential value of £456 million between 2026 and 2028. The programme will span a range of professional capabilities, including artificial intelligence.
The size of the framework is striking. Based on procurement data reported by the Financial Times, it represents the largest individual UK government contract involving Big Four firms recorded by Tussell since its tracking began in 2012.
Yet the award also raises a broader question: how far can government reduce its dependence on external professional services while relying on those same firms to help build the capabilities it wants to bring in-house?
A £456m Ceiling, Rather Than a £456m Bill
The headline number requires some context.
The £456 million represents the upper limit available under the contractual arrangement. It should not be read as a commitment by the Government to spend the entire amount.
Within that ceiling, KPMG can receive up to £319 million, while EY can receive up to £137 million.
The programme is scheduled to operate between 2026 and 2028 and will provide civil servants with training across several areas.
AI is among the skills specifically included.
This makes the award relevant beyond the professional services sector. As artificial intelligence moves deeper into administrative and professional work, governments face the same challenge as large businesses: acquiring the expertise necessary to use new technology effectively while developing sufficient internal knowledge to govern it.
Why the Contract Stands Out
Large contracts between government and major professional services firms are hardly new. The scale of this particular arrangement, however, puts it in a different category.
The previous record identified in Tussell’s procurement data was reportedly a £322 million Foreign Office contract with PwC dating from 2012.
The new KPMG-EY programme potentially exceeds that figure by more than £130 million.
It also arrives during a period in which the Government has been publicly seeking to tighten its use of external advisers.
In 2024, ministers set out plans to halve government consultancy expenditure, targeting savings of more than £1.2 billion by 2026.
That makes the classification of the latest award particularly important.
The Government Says This Is Not Consultancy
The Cabinet Office’s position is that the programme should not be treated as another large consulting engagement.
It is training expenditure.
That distinction changes the rationale behind the contract. Traditional consultancy generally involves buying external expertise to advise on or perform specific work. Training, by contrast, is intended to transfer expertise to the organisation’s own employees.
Seen from that perspective, the KPMG and EY programme could form part of the Government’s attempt to reduce external dependency rather than contradict it.
The stated direction is also temporary: the arrangement is expected to be phased out as an internal government training model is developed.
In other words, external providers are being used to accelerate the creation of capabilities that the civil service ultimately intends to maintain itself.
Big Four Public-Sector Business Is Still Growing
The wider procurement numbers nevertheless show that the relationship between the UK Government and the Big Four remains substantial.
The Financial Times reported that Big Four firms have already secured around £1.25 billion of UK government contracts this year.
For comparison, approximately £1.06 billion was recorded across the whole of the previous year.
The figures are not directly equivalent to consultancy expenditure — government procurement from the firms can cover different types of services — but they underline the continuing role of the Big Four in major public-sector programmes.
This is particularly relevant as governments expand their requirements in areas such as digital transformation, data, technology and AI, where specialist expertise can be difficult to build quickly within existing public-sector structures.
The Bigger Issue: Who Builds Government Capability?
The £456 million framework illustrates a wider challenge facing large public institutions.
Reducing reliance on external advisers is relatively straightforward as a policy objective. Building enough internal expertise to replace that support is considerably more difficult.
AI makes the issue even more pronounced.
Technology is evolving faster than traditional government training and recruitment cycles. Public bodies therefore have to decide whether to develop expertise internally over time, recruit specialists from increasingly competitive labour markets, or purchase knowledge from external providers.
The UK appears to be combining those approaches.
KPMG and EY will initially provide substantial external training capacity, while the Government works towards a model in which more of that capability is delivered internally.
Whether that transition ultimately reduces external professional services expenditure will be the more important measure of the programme than the £456 million headline itself.
FAQ
Has the UK Government committed to spending £456 million?
No. £456 million is the maximum contractual value, rather than guaranteed expenditure. Actual spending may be lower.
How much of the contract can KPMG receive?
KPMG’s portion of the framework is capped at £319 million.
What is EY’s maximum share?
EY can receive up to £137 million under the arrangement.
What type of training will be provided?
The programme covers multiple skills areas for UK civil servants, with artificial intelligence among the areas included.
Why is the contract being compared with the Government’s consultancy cuts?
The Government previously committed to substantially reducing consultancy expenditure. The Cabinet Office argues that the new arrangement is different because it concerns training designed to strengthen internal civil service capabilities, rather than conventional consultancy.
Is the arrangement intended to become permanent?
No. The Government has indicated that the external training arrangement will be phased out as an in-house training model is developed.
Why is the award significant for the Big Four?
According to the procurement data reported by the Financial Times, it is the largest single UK government contract involving Big Four firms recorded by Tussell since 2012.