Examination of Witnesses (Questions 120-139)
RT HON
JOHN HUTTON
MP
1 NOVEMBER 2005
Q120 Mr Burrowes: Ann Abraham described
it as constitutionally exceptional that recommendations are not
being followed through by the Government in relation to the Ombudsman's
reports. We are talking about an exceptional period of time here,
where the customer—focused agenda you are suggesting of
following up grievances has not been followed through.
Mr Hutton: As I say, we should
try to deal with the concerns that have been raised about the
tax credit system. I know Dawn Primarolo is fully engaged in doing
that and we are trying to improve the quality of the service that
HMRC provides for the taxpayer and for tax credit recipients.
If there are areas where we have not agreed with the Ombudsman,
I am sure Treasury ministers can set out the case for that.
Q121 Mr Burrowes: With respect, this
is not an issue of individual minister responses, but perhaps
it does come primarily within your role of promoting good governance.
Is there not a concern, when the Ombudsman is raising concerns
about maladministration which goes beyond individual cases, and
refers, as she has done, to systemic maladministration, that we
are talking about a trend in government which needs to be addressed
in a coordinated way? Perhaps it is your role to ensure that those
recommendations are followed through where an individual minister
may be reluctant in their own department to follow them through,
and that is where you come in, to ensure that there should be
proper grievances followed through.
Mr Hutton: I am sure it happens.
The Cabinet Office is the Government department responsible for
the work of the Ombudsman, but responding to the Ombudsman's report
is the responsibility of the department to which those concerns
have been addressed. It is not the responsibility of the Cabinet.
I do not think there is a trend, as you suggested, of maladministration
in relation to Government.
Q122 Mr Burrowes: The Ombudsman has
said that. The Ombudsman herself said that there would appear
to be a pick-and-choose approach to recommendations. That has
only occurred, it seems, in the last months.
Mr Hutton: In fairness to Treasury
ministers, because you are putting them under a cosh here, I think
they are working very hard to improve the administration of the
tax credits system. I think they are engaged fully with that.
I think we know where the problems are and we are trying to sort
them out, so I think it would not be true to say, as it were,
that ministers somehow are holding up two fingers to the Ombudsman
in quite the way that you are suggesting. We are working very
hard to try to improve the system and that work is going to continue.
Q123 Mr Burrowes: You say that apart
from the Army and the Police Service there are no guarantees in
terms of provider.
Mr Hutton: No, that is not what
I was saying. I was asked what I felt were the core services of
Government.
Q124 Mr Burrowes: I am sorry, I have
misinterpreted. More in terms of satisfaction of service, this
previous Committee has come up with a suggestion of a public service
guarantee in terms of the commitment of certain services. Would
you say that is necessary, or is it sufficient for the ministers
themselves to be able to guarantee a service?
Mr Hutton: It is necessary for
a minister to guarantee a service?
Q125 Mr Burrowes: Is it necessary
to have a public service guarantee? Or should we properly be able
to rely upon a minister saying, "Yes, this service is guaranteed"?
Mr Hutton: I think there is an
attraction in the public service guarantee argument. The argument
really is about how we can ensure that there is a process, not
just a process but a product, that guarantees that public services
will do the things we want them to do. I think the tools that
we are using to do it are a combination of the things we have
spent the morning discussing. Choice: it is a good thing for people
to have choice; it is a respectable thing to offer. Incentives
are a good way of improving performance. And, yes, contestability
around tackling underperformance in the public service, sometimes
by replacing services with other parts of the public service or
sometimes by, yes, bringing in new providers who can provide a
better service. It is a combination of those things that will
drive up performance. I do believe—and I have said this
publicly many times—that we need a combination of what you
can describe as the top-down approach combined with a very strong
bottom-up approach as well, which empowers the consumer of those
public services to make sure that the service providers are doing
the things they should be doing for them. I am generally not dogmatic
about it at all. The people I worry about the most are the consumers
of these public services. If they pay for the services, they are
entitled to a proper deal.
Q126 Mr Burrowes: If I could bring
it down to a local level. Consumers in Enfield may well look at
the merits of a public service guarantee, because as Health Minister
before the election, you guaranteed the continuance of an A&E
in Enfield, in Chase Farm Hospital, and since that time we now
have plans to downgrade that same A&E.
Mr Hutton: I am not familiar with
the work that has happened at Chase Farm. I was dealing with it
when I was the Health Minister, but if you ask me to say what
is happening with the A&E department at Chase Farm, I am really
sorry, I will not be able to deal with that question today.
Q127 Mr Liddell-Grainger: Could I
go on to the accounts, please. I have been going through the various
units that you have in the Cabinet Office. I am intrigued by two
or three things. In the Department's report 2005, the accounts
2004-05, there are four departments that I cannot find: the Government
Social Search Unit, the Corporate Development Group, the Office
of Public Service Reform and the Regulatory Impact Group. Where
do they figure in the Cabinet Office groupings?
Mr Hutton: I do not understand
why those figures are not available in that report. If you would
like the figures for that year for those units, I will make sure
that they are available.[12]
I have the figures, for example, for 2005-06, for the Office of
Public Service Reform.
Q128 Mr Liddell-Grainger: I am just taking
them out of your accounts. You are employing nearly 2,000 people.
Mr Hutton: Not in those units.
Across the Cabinet Office as a whole.
Q129 Mr Liddell-Grainger: But I do
not know where these units are. Also—well done—the
Director of Information Assurance wins an award. Congratulations.
Mr Hutton: Very good.
Q130 Mr Liddell-Grainger: Where is
the CSIA[13]
in this? I cannot find them either, but they have won an award.
Steve Marsh—what a guy. Where is he?
Mr Hutton: If you want the figures,
we will get them to you. That is all I can say.
Q131 Mr Liddell-Grainger: If you
would. On another point, Alan Milburn was the Chancellor of the
Duchy of Lancaster, he cost £210,000. I cannot find where
that is accounted for in the accounts. Is that taken from the
Cabinet Office accounts or is that off balance-sheet accounting?
I cannot find any note on that at all. It is quite rightly put
in. It says the cost of his office from the date 31 March 2005
is just over £200,000. Obviously that is your role now, but
I do not see where that is. Why is that taken as a separate note?
Mr Hutton: I do not know where
it is, I am afraid.
Mr Liddell-Grainger: Page 10.
Mr Hutton: I am sorry, I do not
know where these figures appear in the accounts, but there is
nothing off-balance sheet or in the Cabinet Office's—
Q132 Mr Liddell-Grainger: I cannot
find where it is taken in. If I can move on, somebody mentioned
the dispute you had with IT NET UK and you said it was sorted
out and it has been done amicably, but yet you are still having
to take lease hardware payment streams totalling just under £6
million. What I cannot work out is whether that is an annual figure,
because you have a capital asset base in your e-government of
£122 million. One, are you still taking forward leasing and
payment streams totalling £6 million?
Mr Hutton: I am not sure about
that figure but I can confirm that to the Committee.[14]
Q133 Mr Liddell-Grainger: Secondly, the
Centre for Management and Policy Studies—and I accept that
is slightly out of the remit—is taken in here for accountancy
purposes yet there are no staff levels, there is no break-down.
You are spending at the moment £9.4 million, that has just
been spent, and another £4.8 million on it and there is a
PFI agreement of £3.5 million, so an awful lot of money has
been spent on it and I have no problem with that. What I cannot
work out is, it is not mentioned in the Departmental Report at
all but it is in the accounts. Is there a reason for that?
Mr Hutton: I think it is part
of the budget line under the Corporate Development Group but I
could be wrong. That is certainly where the National School of
Government, which is the old CMPS, sits and there are about 250
members of staff who work there.
Q134 Mr Liddell-Grainger: Is it the
responsibility of the Cabinet Office?
Mr Hutton: Yes.
Q135 Mr Liddell-Grainger: Am I missing
it then in one of these units? I do not think I am.
Mr Hutton: I suspect the budget
for what was the Civil Service College, now the National School
of Government, is part of what we call the CDG, the Corporate
Development Group, budget line. If that is not true, I will let
you know.
Chairman: If you would pick up these
points from Ian and drop us notes, that would be the best thing.
Q136 Mr Liddell-Grainger: One last
thing. Why under e-government in 2004-05 have you other expenditure
of £24 million?
Mr Hutton: I have no idea.
Q137 Mr Liddell-Grainger: When it
was £6 million the year before?
Mr Hutton: I do not know but I
will explain that in the note.
Mr Liddell-Grainger: That is an awful
lot of money.
Chairman: Perhaps you could clear that
up too.[15]
Q138 Mr Liddell-Grainger: Lastly, just
as a matter of interest, why on earth have you got the London
and Harrington Radio Mast as a capital asset?
Mr Hutton: Is that part of the
Cabinet Office?
Q139 Mr Liddell-Grainger: It is an
actual valuation of the Cabinet Office. You have stuff like 10
Downing Street, Whitehall, the Civil Service College and then
the London and Harrington Radio Mast. Do we need an inquiry!
Mr Hutton: Probably.
Chairman: We would have been astonished
if you had known the answer to that question. This is clearly
a leading question and you will have to write to us about that
too.[16]
12 Ev 42, further point 3 Back
13
Central Sponsor for Information Assurance Back
14
Ev 38, points 3-6 Back
15
Ev 38, point 1 Back
16
Ev 42, further point 1 Back
| 
