APPENDIX E
CORE FUNDING TABLES
Could the Office provide an explanation as to
why the resource budget totals from 1999-2000 onwards and the
recorded capital budget total for 2001-02 in tables 1, 2 and 3
have been restated in the Departmental Report 2004 in comparison
to those reported in the Departmental Report 2003?
Since the 2003 Departmental Report was published
the NIO has been working with our Treasury colleagues in addressing
some issues regarding the recording of full resource accounting
outturn information correctly onto the Treasury database. The
result of this work has been to restate some of the outturn figures
which have appeared in the 2004 Departmental Report.
Could the Office provide a note mapping the resource
allocation lines in table 2 to the expenditure classifications
in table 2.1 on page 9?
| Table 2 | Table 2.1
|
| Other Policing and Security Costs | Policing and Security Directorate
|
| Direct Policing Costs | Police Service/Board NI
|
| Patten Report Severance Costs | Police Service/Board NI
|
| Patten Report Non-Severance Costs | Police Service/Board NI
|
| Forensic Science | Forensic Science
|
| Criminal Justice | Criminal Justice, CICAPNI, PBNI
|
| Public Prosecution Service | Dept of the Director of Public Prosecutions
|
| Prisons | NI Prison Service
|
| Compensation Agency | Compensation Agency
|
| Bloody Sunday Inquiry | Political Directorate
|
| Youth Justice Agency | Youth Justice Agency
|
| Other | Information and Central Service, CSO, Political, Civil Service Commissioners
|
| |
Why is the "Patten Report: severance costs" estimated
resource outturn for 2003-04 significantly reduced on both the
previous year's outturn (a reduction of 76%) and the future expenditure
forecasts (a reduction of 69%)?
The reason for the reduced outturn in 2003-04 is due to the
suspension of the severance programme for one year in 2003-04.
The suspension was part of the 2002 workforce plan, and was intended
to allow numbers of regular officers to reach the Patten recommended
level of 7,500. As a result no new applications for the severance
programme were accepted for 2003-04, leaving only a number of
officers who had applied to leave in the previous year, but whose
exit had been deferred, allowed to depart in 2003-04. The scheme
re-opened to officers from 1 April 2004 and it is intended that
the scheme will continue until 2010-11 at which time it is expected
that the target of 30% Catholic representation within the police
service will have been met.
Why does the "Compensation Agency" resource budget
profile dip by £7 million (22%) in 2004-05 and then increase
by £16 million (64%) in 2005-06?
The resource budget for the Compensation Agency has been
falling over the last number of years and the reasons for this
have been well documented. The Main Estimate provision for 2004-05
has been set to reflect this trend. The provisional allocation
for 2005-06 has not been fully reduced to reflect the Agencies
reducing spend as we are aware that there is still scope for increases
in the number and value of claims particularly for the Tariff
Scheme. The 2005-06 baselines for Compensation Agency will be
revisited this year as part of the Departments wider planning
exercise following the SR2004 settlement.
Why has the "Other" resource line increased by 108%
between 2002-03 and 2005-06?
This is because the Department has been building up its DUP
allocation, as recommended by HM Treasury as part of the SR2004
process, and the DUP budget lines are included under the "Other"
heading. This has largely come from easements within Compensation
Agency, and will be used to meet a range of anticipated pressures.
Why has the "Criminal Justice" line capital expenditure
increased by almost a factor of 10 between 2002-03 and the estimated
outturn for 2003-04, and why is the budget set to more than double
on the previous year in 2005-06?
The reason for the increasing capital consumption for Criminal
Justice is that there are three major capital projects at present,
which will run through to 2005-06. The three projects are the
Causeway IT project (linking all the main Criminal Justice organisations
in NI together), a new State Pathology Building, and a new Juvenile
Justice Centre at Rathgael.
Can the Office provide a note setting out the reasons for the
movements to the "Public Prosecution Service", "Prisons"
and "Other" capital budgets between 2003-04 and 2005-06?
The main reasons for increasing capital budgets for these
areas, is to allow the development of regional accommodation for
the new Public Prosecution Service, new prisoner accommodation
blocks to cope with and segregation issue arising from the Steele
Review and an increasing prisoner population, and within "Other"
the "Flax" project which is a major capital upgrade
to the Department's main IT network system.
Could the Office provide a table setting out capital employed,
as required by the PES guidance?
CAPITAL EMPLOYED BY THE NORTHERN IRELAND OFFICE
| 1999-2000 | 2000-01
| 2001-02 | 2002-03
| 2003-04 | 2004-05
| 2005-06 | 2006-07
| 2007-08 |
| £000 | £000
| £000 | £000
| £000 | £000
| £000 | £000
| £000 |
| outturn | outturn
| outturn | outturn
| draft (3) | plans
| plans | plans |
plans |
| Fixed assets (1) | 609,179 |
636,183 | 687,445 | 702,486
| 763,571 | 819,095 | 864,918
| 938,973 | 1,023,160 |
| Current assets | |
| | | |
| | | |
| Stocks | 8,350 |
8,620 | 9,613 | 13,021
| 7,497 | 6,452 | 6,488
| 5,500 | 4,500 |
Debtors
(<1yr and
>1yr)
| 27,159 | 50,567 | 17,155
| 35,965 | 29,772 | 38,825
| 37,977 | 35,367 | 34,163
|
| Cash | 26,292 | 165
| 48,312 | 7,599 | 8,427
| 6,816 | 6,816 | 6,816
| 6,816 |
| Creditors <1yr | (243,678)
| (184,097) | (373,113) | (185,123)
| (186,454) | (88,317) | (90,161)
| (87,560) | (86,742) |
| Creditors > 1yr (2) | (39,989)
| (34,805) | (30,771) | (24,799)
| (19,811) | (14,750) | (9,800)
| (4,900) | 0 |
| Provisions | (317,124) | (259,409)
| (253,049) | (260,405) | (314,092)
| (365,403) | (220,629) | (142,140)
| (100,601) |
| Capital employed | 70,189
| 217,224 | 105,592
| 288,744 | 288,910
| 402,718 | 595,609
| 752,056 | 881,296
|
| (1) This excludes the National Loan Funds Investment disclosed in the Resource Accounts.
| | | |
| | | |
| |
| (2) This excludes the balance due to the National Loans Fund.
| | | |
| | | |
| |
| (3) Resource accounts for the NIO for 2003-04 are currently being audited and the figures included here are in draft.
| | | |
| | | |
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
How does the Office intend to achieve the Gershon report 2.5%
efficiency savings target when its gross administrative costs
are set to rise by 9% on the previous year in both 2004-05 and
2005-06 (table 5)? What will be the baseline for measuring any
reductions?
The NIO has embarked upon an ambitious Efficiency Programme
and will be working closely with staff across the department to
validate the workstreams proposed to date.
Efficiency savings will be measured against the 2004-05 baseline.
Why have the forecast staff numbers reduced in comparison to
the 2003 DAR (table 6)? In what areas are staff cuts to be made
compared to the previous budget and why?
The 2003 Departmental Report took account of projected staffing
figures supplied by the DPP in connection with the establishment
of the Public Prosecution Service. This has been happening in
slower time and the 2004 Departmental Report reflects this by
producing lower statistics.
The expectation would have been that as the DPP continues
to expand the figures would again have come closer to the 2003
Departmental Report. However, with the current Efficiency Review
this may be offset by a reduction of staff working in the Core.
The Efficiency Programme involves forecasting those areas
where staff reductions are expected over the SR2004 period. The
NIO expects to make savings in the region of 128 posts in the
core Department and a further 26 posts in the Department's "other
bodies" (ie non-civil service posts).
Why does the "other" administrative expenditure line
(table 5) not shown a decrease linked to the reduction in staff
numbers (as fewer staff usually means less accommodation will
be required)? Why does this line in table 5 actually show an increase
to forecast costs compared with those reported in the Departmental
Report for 2003?
The Department's total administration allocation up to and
including 2005-06 has not changed greatly since the 2003 Departmental
Report, however as the question states the non-pay element has
gone up. This is because the Department's administration Unallocated
Provision (DUP) is included in the "other" heading and
we have been re-allocating any savings and reclassifications from
pay costs into the DUP in order to give the Department as strong
a DUP as possible going into the SR2004 period.
FROM RESOURCE ACCOUNTS 2002-03
Can the Office set out progress against each of the actions
listed on the schedule submitted to HM Treasury of the work to
be done to meet the requirements for the Statement on Internal
Control?
Core Department
The NIO continues to engage fully with the Treasury led risk
programme. In particular, against the risk management action points
in the letter of 26 June 2003:
— The senior management event was held and was chaired
by the Permanent Secretary. It succeeded in raising awareness
of the benefits of good risk management. The HMT Risk Support
Team participated and contributed to its success.
— An NIO risk toolkit has been developed and issued.
It was well received in the Department and is now (August 2004)
being revised in the light of experience.
— The 2004-05 business planning process took into
account the results of an exercise to learn the lessons from 2003-04.
In particular risk has now been embedded into the process and
there is a top-level Risk Register owned by the Departmental Board.
— The NIO's central risk team is available to assist
business units in techniques for managing their risks. Our training
and development function is being refocused and risk will be integrated
into many of its products.
— The internal audit of risk management processes
is not yet complete. It is included within the audit plan for
2004-05.
— The improved risk capacity of the NIO is quantified
by an increased score against the Risk Management Assessment Framework
in line with the expectations set by the Treasury Risk Support
Team.
The Department issued its Health and Safety policy in June
this year.
The Cabinet Office and unions confirmed that they were content
with the Equal Pay Report. The report has since been placed in
the House of Commons Library.
Compensation Agency
Progress was as follows:
— development of a formal Risk Management policy
by June 2003; (Executive responsibility for the risk management
process within the Agency rests with the Head of Operations. As
one of the Agency's most senior managers, the Head of Operations
is well placed to ensure that risk management remains visible
and focused. In addition, all members of staff, through their
individual roles within the Agency, have responsibility for managing
the risks associated with those roles. The policy on Risk Management
was informed by other policy developments eg the revised Fraud
policy issued by the Department towards the year-end);
— completion of risk review arrangements, including
consideration by the Agency Strategy Group by June 2003; (One
of the specific roles of the Agency Strategy Group is to ensure
that risk management is embedded into the corporate planning and
decision-making processes of the Agency. Under the Terms of Reference
for the Group, risk management is a standing agenda item at all
meetings of the Group. The Group met regularly throughout 2003-04
using the Agency's risk matrix to help to identify and quantify
all risks facing the Agency);
— completion and publication within Agency of Risk
Matrix including allocation of Risk ownership by October 2003;
(see bullet point 2, above); and
— review training needs on Risk Management by September
2003. (During 2003-04, the Chief Executive attended further risk
management training seminars and was aware of the need to further
embed the risk management culture throughout the entire Agency
by cascading the risks identified on the risk matrix to every
member of staff. There is a continuing need to ensure that risks
that are identified at all levels are incorporated into the risk
management framework).
Northern Ireland Prison Service
The Agency has in place a risk management strategy which,
at the appropriate level, identifies, evaluates and assigns ownership
of risks to all areas of activity. Risks are incorporated in a
risk matrix that continues to be developed, to assess impact/likelihood
and allocate ownership.
Risk is being embedded through the Agency via:
— directorate management meetings;
— weekly meeting of the executive members of the
Board to consider operational issues; and
— project Board meetings.
Northern Ireland Policing Board
The Board audit committee approved the risk register as planned
and the Internal Audit function has been contracted out.
Office of the Police Ombudsman
The Office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland completed
the development of its risk management process during the 2003-04
financial year. A risk register has been established which details
the key strategic risks in the Office and is underpinned by a
detailed operational risk register. The risk register was presented
to the Audit Committee of the Office on 21 October 2003. This
register is subject to a continual review process.
PSNI
The draft Corporate Risk Register was cleared by the Audit
& Risk Committee in June 2004 and is being presented to the
Chief Officers for endorsement.
The Internal Audit function was contracted out in August
2003.
Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission
The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission has considered
its risk management arrangements internally and is currently working
with central procurement agency to commission an external risk
assessment exercise to be undertaken during September 2004.
Can the Office provide a note summarising progress on the Causeway
programme? Has a contract been signed or an agreement been reached
and, if so, what format does the preferred option of a PPP deal
take? When was this agreed?
The Causeway Programme is a joint enterprise by the criminal
justice organisations (CJOs) of Northern Ireland[1]
which aims to improve their performance by sharing information
electronically. The vision of the Causeway Programme is that:
"All the information shared within the criminal justice
system will be accurate, consistent, up-to-date and accessible
electronically by the staff who have a need to use it."
The work of the programme is:
— to rationalise and improve business processes
and information flows within the Criminal Justice System;
— to create a data sharing mechanism and core technology
infrastructure;
— to adapt existing and planned computer applications
to exploit the electronic transfer of information between criminal
justice organisations; and
— to facilitate changes in the organisation and
working practices of the CJOs to ensure that all the expected
benefits of the new information systems are achieved.
Once CJO business systems are interconnected, Causeway will
deliver the following improvements to the administration of justice:
— easier access to information;
— rapid transfer of information;
— reduced duplication of effort;
— cross-CJO consistency of information;
— reductions in the need to make and respond to
queries;
— an enhanced capacity to deliver additional services
in future; and
— reductions in the costs of paper-handling.
The Programme is being delivered in three phases: Analysis,
Procurement and Implementation. Phases 1 and 2 were completed
on time and within budget. Phase 3 is on schedule and also within
budget.
The Causeway technical solution comprises three elements:
— a data sharing mechanism (DSM);
— a core infrastructure; and
— adaptations to the CJO back office systems that
enable them to make use of, and contribute to, the DSM.
The core infrastructure and central data sharing mechanism
have been installed on time. The adaptations to existing CJO systems
are ongoing.
The programme is avoiding a "big bang" approach
to implementation. Electronic information sharing is being introduced
in a series of four stages. These stages, and the types of information
that will be shared, are shown below.
The first electronic information sharing delivered by the
programme was the Causeway Criminal Record Viewer (CRV). This
was delivered on time in March 2004. It provides the Prosecution,
Probation and Prison services with secure on-line access to criminal
records. Whereas before implementation of the CRV it could take
up to three weeks to obtain a copy of a criminal record, now this
information is immediately available. Over 500 such checks are
now being made every week. Other organisations in Northern Ireland
that have a requirement to check criminal records (eg DVLNI and
the Compensation Agency) have expressed an strong interest in
linking to this system.
Causeway is a high risk project. The risks are attributable
to:
— the scale of business change involved;
— the technical difficulty of adapting six existing
systems;
— the difficulty of estimating the costs of these
adaptations; and
— the challenges of managing a cross-cutting programme.
To date these risks have been managed successfully, mainly
as a result of the strong commitment of all stakeholders.
In June the programme was awarded a BT Syntegra/Government
Computing award for Innovation.
A contract has been signed with Fujitsu plc for the supply
of the technology services required to achieve the business objectives
of Causeway.
Fujitsu have contracted to provide information sharing services
to the Criminal Justice Organisations for a period of 10 years.
Neither the Criminal Justice Organisations nor the NIO are buying
any capital equipment under the terms of this agreement. Fujitsu
are required to achieve demanding service levels in terms of availability,
integrity, confidentiality and speed of data transfer. The payment
it will receive is related to the achievement of these targets.
The contract with Fujitsu was signed on 28 August 2003.
The explanation of variances to Schedule 1 shows numerous differences
between the Estimate and outturn arising due to errors in the
preparation of the original budgets. What actions has the Office
taken to ensure that such a level of error will not recur in the
2003-04 resource account?
The Department has made a number of improvements in its resource
budgeting processes during 2003-04, and is continuing to improve
its performance during 2004-05. In 2003-04 the Department developed
systems which allowed it to move to monthly resource accounting
and budget monitoring, including the development of its fixed
asset recording. There has been an investment of resources behind
this move which is starting to see major improvements.
September 2004
1
The Criminal Justice Directorate of the Northern Ireland Office;
the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for Northern
Ireland; the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI); the Northern
Ireland Court Service (NICtS); the Probation Board for Northern
Ireland (PBNI); the Northern Ireland Prison Service (NIPS); and
Forensic Science Northern Ireland (FSNI). Back
|
