Correspondence with the Cabinet Office
regarding the Winter Supplementary Estimate
2007-08
Letter dated 28 November 2007 from the
Clerk of the Committee to Sir Gus O'Donnell
WINTER SUPPLEMENTARY
ESTIMATE 2007-08
The Committee has had a brief opportunity to
consider the Winter Supplementary Estimates, which were laid on
12th November and will be considered in the House on 5 December,
along with the accompanying Estimate Memorandum. I have been asked
to seek further information from you on a few matters, and would
be grateful if you could assist me by answering the questions
set out below.
SCOPE PROJECT AND
FUTUREBUILDERS
The Resource Account states that the "main
contract delivery phase" of SCOPE has been extended. What
is the cause of the delay, and what are its consequences, both
operational and financial?
We note that the Cabinet Office's stock of end-year
flexibility (that is, its cumulative prior-year under-spends)
mainly appears to derive from a very large 2006-07 under-spend
on its Futurebuilders scheme which is intended to improve capacity
in the third sector. The capital under-spend was £99m (of
£109m budgeted). The Resource Account says this is because
of slower than expected demand for grants from the third sector.
We would be grateful if you could explain the basis on which the
Cabinet Office budgeted for Futurebuilders expenditure in 2006-07,
and account for the significant discrepancy between predicted
and actual uptake.
With SCOPE capital funds coming from End-Year
Flexibility funds, there is an issue that it (ie, SCOPE) might
be funded by monies originally meant for the charities capacity-building
programme. The Resource Account states that £46m of the under-spend
has been "re-profiled". The remaining £67m is still
potentially available for use under Futurebuilders although the
timing of this is unclear. Do your accounts indicate that the
Futurebuilders programme is being curtailed or down-graded? If
so, how does this impact the Government's overall strategy for
the third sector?
RFR 1—B OFFICE
OF THE
THIRD SECTOR
The change in gross provision is stated as an
increase of £7.87m. Some £3.235m is accounted for in
the Estimate Memorandum (Children in Need £299K; V matched
funding £3.3m; Invest to Save £399K; and a transfer
to DCLG reducing administration expenditure minus £764).
The remaining £4.635m is not clearly attributed. How is the
£4.635m remainder allocated?
ADMINISTRATION BUDGET
The latest Estimate Memorandum shows that administration
expenditure was 73% of the limit in 2004-05, 81% in 2005-06, and
67% in 2006-07. The Memorandum states that the limit "included
costs subsequently classified as other current/programme relating
to depreciation and cost of capital largely in connection with
Transformational Government assets".
What proportion of the administration limit is accounted
for by Transformational Government-related items in each year?
What other factors are contributing to the Cabinet
Office's underspend on its Administration Budget?
BBC MONITORING
The Estimate also includes the transfer of BBC
Monitoring to the Cabinet Office, with £3.3m of attached
funding. There is also a draw-down of an extra £5m "to
ensure funding is at the agreed level'. Why, if the CO has taken
on responsibility for BBC Monitoring, is the cost being reassessed
as £5m higher?.
The £5m funding to provide budgetary cover
for BBC monitoring is classified as a DEL Reserve claim in the
Supplementary Estimate. Reserve claims should only be made for
events that cannot be foreseen. When did Cabinet Office first
become aware that BBC Monitoring would require extra budgetary
cover in 2007-08?
Please could you let me have a reply by 18 December
2007. This may be drawn on by the Committee in future evidence
sessions and inquiries.
| 
