Conclusions and recommendations
1. We
remain committed to examining each year the work of public bodies
associated with Defra. (Paragraph 14)
2. Once again this
year we have not been specifically informed by Defra in advance
(or, indeed, afterwards) of any of these appointments to posts
in non-departmental public bodies or elsewhere. We recommend,
as we did last year, that the Department put in place procedures
to inform us in advance of all major appointments pending and/or
made, in line with the recommendation of the Liaison Committee.
(Paragraph 15)
3. We regret that
the Government did not invite us to undertake pre-legislative
scrutiny of any of these Bills; nor did it make time available
to do so. (Paragraph 17)
4. In general, the
Department's account of its expenditure was much improved compared
to 2002. Nevertheless, we noted in our report that there are ways
in which transparency might be further improved, such as by giving
a commentary of performance against objectives, and by setting
out the key financial data relating to each Departmental objective.
(Paragraph 20)
5. We will continue
to pay close attention to the ways in which Defra spends money,
and how it accounts for its expenditure. (Paragraph 21)
6. We are grateful
to Ministers for attending our meetings so often. We trust that
our good relationship with them will continue during 2004. (Paragraph
23)
7. Assessment of Defra's
performance against its Public Service Agreement targets is a
significant part of our work in holding the Department to account.
We reiterate the view expressed in past Annual Reports that analysis
of performance against PSA targets should be a major part of each
annual Departmental Report. We trust that Defra will continue
to strive to improve the way it reports its performance against
such targets - and in those areas not covered by specific PSA
targets. (Paragraph 26)
8. We continue to
be strongly supportive of the work of the Scrutiny Unit, which
complements the work of our own staff. (Paragraph 30)
|