Supplementary memorandum from HM Treasury
I am writing to follow up points raised at the
PAC hearing on 21 May.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER
RESPONSIBILITIES
1. Mr Griffiths asked about Treasury oversight
on departments' expenditure and activities. The chairman returned
to the issue later in the hearing.
2. As I explained to the committee, the
Treasury looks to Accounting Officers to deliver the standards
of resource management and accountability expected of those managing
public funds. These were recently refreshed (though not changed)
in Managing Public Money. I enclose a copy of the relevant
chapter which delineates the responsibilities of Accounting Officers.[7]
3. With this vital safeguard in place, the
Treasury does not seek to micro manage departments or other public
sector organisations. It is important that departments are free
to develop systems and processes appropriate to their own circumstances
so that they can operate efficiently to deliver the policies and
outcomes that ministers want. The Treasury concentrates on strategic
issues, notably delivery of public service agreements (PSAs) and
now departmental strategic objectives (DSOs).
4. As a safety net there are always systems
providing for exception reporting, dialogue about major investment
projects and clearance of novel and contentious transactions.
These systems are agreed between the Treasury and departments,
bespoke to the circumstances and may be renegotiated from time
to time. In particular, it is usual for Treasury oversight to
be more intensive for unfamiliar or unusual transactions or events.
5. Turning now to specific circumstances
of RCPO, it was unusual to have a new department headed by someone
unfamiliar with the standards of the public sector. What went
wrong was that Mr Green did not get specific support to help him
through the startup process.
6. The Treasury intends to:
— alert departments generally to the
need for customised day to day support for new public sector organisations,
especially where the Accounting Officer is new to the public service.
The responsibility should normally fall primarily to the sponsor
department of a new department (or new NDPB);
— arrange specific bespoke training
facilities with the National School for Government for Accounting
officers in these circumstances; and
— arrange to tell new Accounting Officers
to new public sector organisations about the support available
when they are appointed.
7. The NSG is still designing the courses
for the Treasury. What they have in mind is tailored advice and
support to meet the needs of individuals newly appointed as Accounting
Officers in the context of the organisations they are to lead.
They will offer the expertise of a number of former Accounting
Officers, who already work as Associates of the NSG, including
two or three former Permanent Secretaries. These additional services
will be made available to those who have attended the NSG's
Introduction to Public Accountability course from which NSG
will be able to identify their backgrounds and needs.
OTHER PROSECUTING
AUTHORITIES
8. As I warned at the hearing, a good number
of public sector organisations employ barristers routinely. It
is proving to be a substantial task to track them down and gather
information about how they manage the fees they pay the barristers
they use. I hope to let you have a fuller note on this shortly.
In the meantime, it may be helpful to provide the committee with
some information on the two leading prosecuting authorities.
9. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) operates
agreed billing arrangements with the bar to ensure that bills
are submitted in reasonable time. In most cases, the barristers
they employ submit an invoice within three months of the end of
each case. For high cost cases, CPS makes staged payments, subject
to progress, and requires barristers to make claims within 20
days of the end of each stage. CPS keeps track of compliance by
undertaking regular checks and prosecution costs audits. CPS is
satisfied that these arrangements are working well though it continuously
strives to improve performance.
10. The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) also
aims for limited delay in finalising payments by operating a purchase
orders system, which captures most information about barristers'
expenditure at the point of delivery. Divisions within the SFO
responsible for investigating and prosecuting cases are fully
seized of the need to ensure that barristers' invoices are received
promptly.
Paula Diggle
Treasury Officer of Accounts
11 June 2008
7 Not printed here. Back
| 
