Examination of Witnesses (Questions 300-319)
DEPARTMENT FOR
ENVIRONMENT, FOOD
& RURAL AFFAIRS
AND RURAL
PAYMENTS AGENCY
MONDAY 9 JULY
2007
Q300 Mr Bacon: I know—I think
that we are all aware of that. Did it not occur to anyone at any
point during the series of reds that the game was not worth the
candle?
Johnston McNeill: What was the
choice?
Q301 Mr Bacon: The choice, perhaps,
was to stop. Are you saying that, because of EU rules, you had
no choice but to continue through the digitised process?
Johnston McNeill: Certainly by
the time that the EU were informed that we were going for SPS,
there was going have to be some system in place to deal with the
matter; otherwise there would be serious and significant difficulties.
In January 2006, we had a session with the then
Permanent Secretary Helen Ghosh—she also mentions this in
her evidence—in which we carried out a full risk assessment
on all the options, and we considered whether to go for an interim
payment system. That was some weeks before we ran into major problems
in terms of getting the claims through the door. At that stage,
we used a similar system. We put all the options on the table,
so there was a checkpoint. Do we continue with this development,
or do we go for an interim payment and find some other way round
this? The decision was to continue with the RPA IT Application.
That was despite the fact of the track record had been there previously.
Q302 Mr Bacon: That was the decision
of the Executive Review Group?
Johnston McNeill: That was the
decision of the Permanent Secretary, Helen Ghosh, who now says,
"Perhaps in reflection, we should have done something else."
Q303 Mr Bacon: One of the other things
that Helen Ghosh said in evidence was that she suspected that
no one in the Agency had fully understood the whole business process
end to end? Do you think that was fair?
Johnston McNeill: That is not
fair. I do not think that anyone in DEFRA, when they signed up
to introducing task based working and work flow, had any comprehension
what it might mean in terms of customer relations, of trying to
develop a system to do it, or of trying to deal with something
so complex as an SPS scheme. We were aware of the consequences
of work flow and the task-based approach because we were building
the system to do it. We had consultants telling us about it every
day.
Q304 Mr Bacon: You bring me straight
on to the question of why you had two SROs (Senior Responsible
Owners). You had Mr Andy Lebrecht as the SRO for policy and you
were the SRO for implementation. As I understand it, the whole
point is to have one SRO who is responsible. That is the point.
Johnston McNeill: That was recommended
by the OGC and rejected by the Department.
Q305 Mr Bacon: This notion of having
two SROs, one for policy and one for implementation, is not common
across Whitehall. It sounds like an attempt to drive a coach and
horses through the idea of having an SRO.
Johnston McNeill: We had two SROs
and a Permanent Secretary directly involved in the programme on
almost a daily basis.
Q306 Mr Bacon: You were, in effect,
being responsible for decisions that you were not always party
to.
Johnston McNeill: That is a fair
point.
Q307 Mr Bacon: I would like to ask
you about compensation. Mrs Ghosh wrote us a note in which she
said that you had been offered half a year's salary, which was
about £56,900, a lump sum of £42,000 and a pension of
£12,000, making roughly £110,000[3].
That was then the subject of a dispute. We have had a note saying
that the Civil Service Appeal Board has looked at your case[4].
Judging by the transcript of the EFRA Committee hearing, it is
fairly obvious that the normal legal processes for dismissal do
not appear to have been gone through. You appear to have been
offered a sum of £60,792.50 as compensation, reduced to reflect
the contribution that you made to your own dismissal. DEFRA is
recommended to pay that amount to you. Is that an amount on top
of the £56,900, the £42,000 and the £12,000 pension
that you were offered?
Johnston McNeill: Yes. I have
taken the case to the Civil Service Appeal Board and it has ruled
that my dismissal was unfair. It then ruled on compensation, which
initially started out significantly greater than £60,000.
Q308 Mr Bacon: Significantly greater
than £60,000?
Johnston McNeill: Yes, but unfortunately
it was capped at just over £60,000.
Q309 Mr Bacon: But that is in addition
to the £110,000 that I was talking about?
Johnston McNeill: It is in addition
to the other figures that you mentioned.
Q310 Mr Bacon: In addition to the
£80,000, which is the cost of employing you from last March
when you were removed from office until December when you ceased
to be a civil servant. So, there was £190,000 or so plus
£60,000, making a total cost to public funds of roughly £250,000.
Is that correct? Am I in the right ball park?
Johnston McNeill: If you tell
me.
Q311 Mr Bacon: I am just saying.
So, £56,000 for a half-year salary, £42,000 a lump sum
payment, and £12,000 a pension.
Johnston McNeill: That is incorrect.
I have not taken my pension. If I were to take my pension now
that I am 50, then, yes, I would receive a lump sum.
Q312 Mr Bacon: Basically, you were
offered a half-year's salary and a £42,000 lump sum, which
is roughly £100,000.
Johnston McNeill: No, the £42,000
is a pension, which I have paid into for 20 years.
Q313 Mr Bacon: I thought Mrs Ghosh
called it a lump sum. Perhaps it was a lump sum commuted pension.
Johnston McNeill: Civil service
pensions, like local government pensions, offer a lump sum plus
an annual payment.
Q314 Mr Bacon: The £100,000
that Mrs Ghosh mentioned in that letter is in addition to any
payment that you will get as a result of the tribunal process?
Johnston McNeill: Whether I proceed
to tribunal or not is a matter of discussion with my solicitors.
Q315 Mr Bacon: The Department has
already offered you some money. That was before you went to tribunal.
Johnston McNeill: Let us be clear
about this. The Department has paid me six months in lieu of notice,
because that was my contractual requirement. They could find no
suitable grounds on which to dismiss me. For the record, I have
had no disciplinary hearing or correspondence explaining exactly
what I have done wrong, and no opportunity to appeal. I had to
take it to the Civil Service Appeal Board, which is not the normal
appeal process within a Department. The board ruled that I was
unfairly dismissed, which I can assure you did not take long,
and awarded me the maximum award—some £60,000. I am
now considering whether to take further other issues, and that
is a matter of discussion between me and my lawyers.
Q316 Mr Bacon: Have you made a decision
on that?
Johnston McNeill: I have not.
Q317 Mr Bacon: I am not criticising
you for getting what is legally owed to you, but simply trying
to understand. Mrs. Ghosh, despite my asking her several times,
has not provided this Committee with a letter, above her signature,
stating the total cost to public funds. I am trying to understand
what the total cost to public funds is.
Johnston McNeill: I have just
described it as best I understand it.
Q318 Mr Touhig: I have just a few
questions, Mr McNeill. In answer to Mr Curry, you made it clear
that none of the Reports lay any blame on your shoulders for this
debacle.
Johnston McNeill: Sorry, I did
not say that. I think that I was trying to say that no one has
pointed to me and said, "This guy spent three days a week
on holiday," or whatever. There have been no such personal
suggestions. I accept that, as Chief Executive of this organisation,
I carry responsibility.
Q319 Mr Touhig: Yes, but in answer
to Mr Curry, you said that none of the Reports said that you were
responsible for this debacle.
Johnston McNeill: Not through
personal actions, no. That was the point that I was trying to
make.
3 Ev Back
4
Ev Back
| 
