Letter from the Chairman to the Permanent
Secretary, HM Treasury
Thank you for your letter of 28 June 2007 about
the Treasury's involvement with Public Service Agreements (PSAs)
under the 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review and the Treasury's
proposed Departmental Strategic Objectives (DSOs), which I have
now had an opportunity to discuss with other members of the Treasury
Committee.
Your letter makes no specific reference to the
recommendation in paragraph 102 of our recent Report on The 2007
Comprehensive Spending Review: prospects and processes that the
Treasury should provide further information about the proposed
data to be used for measuring progress against targets. No such
information is included in your letter. We understand that this
may not be available at present, but we would be grateful if you
could confirm in reply to this letter that such information is
expected to be provided to us in advance of the final announcements
on the Comprehensive Spending Review, and that your letter of
28 June represents the start of a process of consultation, not
the end of that process.
We note the plans to reduce the overall number
of PSAs, and we are broadly sympathetic to this approach. We also
note the proposals to include what were formerly some of the Treasury's
PSA targets within "outcomes" relating to the DSOs.
You state that these "outcomes will be defined by a set of
indicators", which you will share with us in due course.
Your letter also states that DSOs will "form the basis for
internal performance and resource management". I would be
grateful if you could confirm that each outcome will be the subject
of measurable indicators, that we will see the proposed indicators
in advance and that performance against each of these indicators
will be reported on in your Annual Reports and Autumn Performance
Reports.
You explain that the Treasury is expected to
take the lead on the Child Poverty PSA target. However, the letter
also discusses how, on the Productivity measure, "HM Treasury
is responsible for the overall productivity strategy, including
design and implementation of the productivity framework".
We would be interested to know why it was considered appropriate
for the Treasury to take the lead on the Child Poverty PSA, but
not on the Productivity PSA.
In your letter, you refer to us as "one
of your key stakeholders". In your response to this letter,
it would be helpful if you could explain who else you are consulting
about the Treasury's PSAs and DSOs at this stage.
Finally, you state that "the details shared
in this letter are confidential". It is unusual for information
to be provided to a select committee without prior consultation
on its status. On this occasion, we are content to treat this
exchange of correspondence as confidential at the present juncture,
but we ask that, in your reply, you give your views on whether
the correspondence could be made public by us once the final outcome
of the Comprehensive Spending Review has been announced.
25 July 2007
| 
