Examination of Witnesses (Questions 540
- 559)
TUESDAY 8 DECEMBER 2009
RT HON
STEPHEN TIMMS
MP AND SARAH
MCCARTHY-FRY
MP
Q540 Peter Viggers:
Have you allowed IFRS to slip because you do not wish to publish
the larger debt figures?
Sarah McCarthy Fry: Absolutely
not. It is still a priority that we move towards the IFRS. It
is what we set out to do.
Q541 Peter Viggers:
What assessment have you made of the impact on the Government's
net debt figure of full compliance?
Sarah McCarthy Fry: I do not have
those figures to hand. I will write to the Committee about that.[11]
Peter Viggers: It would be helpful to
have that estimate. Thank you.
Q542 Chairman:
When will we see finally the Whole of Government Accounts?
Sarah McCarthy Fry: We have said
that the 2009-10 accounts will be prepared on a Whole of Government
Accounts basis.
Q543 Chairman:
So we will see them in July; is that right?
Sarah McCarthy Fry: For 2009-10.
Q544 Chairman:
For 2009-10, so we will see them in July 2010?
Sarah McCarthy Fry: That is the
plan and we are on course to do that.
Q545 Chairman:
So the current year's accounts will be Whole of Government Accounts,
is that right? We will see them next July?
Sarah McCarthy Fry: Yes. We are
currently in 2009-10. The NAO, as you know, have reviewed the
dry run that we did and there are still some issues outstanding.
Q546 Chairman:
You are going to exclude the part-nationalised banks, is that
not right?
Sarah McCarthy Fry: That is right.
They are not going to be consolidated within the Whole of Government
Accounts.
Q547 Chairman:
How will that impact on the NAO's opinion?
Sarah McCarthy Fry: That will
be a matter for the NAO.
Q548 Jim Cousins:
I would like to clarify a factual question; I am not trying to
bowl some kind of googly here. The Committee has been concerned
about what proportion of the assets covered by the Asset Protection
Scheme, which now, of course, and in the future will only apply
to RBS, represented assets outside the UK. Yesterday I believe
a figure of 60% was given for that, that 60% of the assets being
protected are outside the UK. I would be grateful if that figure
could be properly confirmed. It is obviously of some importance
to get the facts right, but I am not expecting an answer right
now.
Sarah McCarthy Fry: We will write
to you on that.[12]
Q549 Ms Keeble:
May I ask a final question on the child poverty figures? I understand
that the figures that were provided at the time of the 2007 Budget
were that 180,000 families were to be gainers in 2009-10 and then
350,000 in 2010-11. Presumably the numbers have slipped a bit
because of the month later starting date, but in our brief we
have got a figure of 200,000 working families. Where did that
come from and what are the accurate figures, particularly given
the later starting date?
Mr Timms: These are the figures
relating to the housing benefit change?
Q550 Ms Keeble:
Yes.
Mr Timms: I am afraid I do not
have those in front of me but I would be very happy to take that
question away and provide a note.
Q551 Ms Keeble:
Could you, because there are two things? One is clearly how they
are going to impact on the 2010 target. If the original figure
given was 180,000 and then 350,000 but the scheme starts a month
late because it was due to start from the beginning of October
and in fact started on 2 November and you have given us a figure
of 200,000, there are real discrepancies about what is happening.
I am concerned about the lack of rigour in some of the figures
around all of this on what is obviously a very important target.
Mr Timms: The reassurance I can
provide is that the data when it is compiled for how many children
have been lifted above the poverty line will be very rigorous,
but I take your point that this change could be one of the influences
on that outcome.
Q552 Ms Keeble:
It was the only one that was left out of the three announced in
the 2007 Budget. We have seen all the others come through. This
is the only one which is going to start getting things heading
in the right direction.
Mr Timms: But those other measures
have not yet been reflected in the figures. As I said earlier,
the latest figure we have is half a million children lifted above
the poverty line. Measures we have taken since that measurement
was made we believe will lift an additional half million above
the line.
Q553 Ms Keeble:
This was the biggest one.
Mr Timms: That clearly could have
an impact and I will come back to the Committee with a note on
that.[13]
Q554 Chairman:
Just a final question from me. Last year we expressed concern
that the Treasury itself had underspent on its spending limit
for the sixth consecutive year. Now we find you have underspent
for the seventh consecutive year by £22 million or 10% of
your budget. What do you intend to do with the end-year flexibility
you have accumulated with this repeated underspending?
Sarah McCarthy Fry: Obviously,
we will look at it in the light of the requirements that we have
coming forward. We try and manage our estimates the best we can
and we always put in the resource accounts the reasons for the
underspend, and I think it varies from year to year.
Q555 Chairman:
But it always varies the same way is what concerns this Committee.
You are persistently underspending and the Permanent Secretary
told us that he was frustrated by that, so what are you doing
about it?
Sarah McCarthy Fry: As I say,
we do try and match our estimates to our resources as best we
can. This year it was caused by a higher than expected income.
Last year it was caused by lower than expected costs, so we are
doing our best to try and manage it. Obviously, it is in everyone's
interests if it is more accurate.
Q556 Chairman:
Have you changed end of year flexibility policy for the other
government departments?
Sarah McCarthy Fry: Not to my
knowledge, no.
Q557 Chairman:
Because the NAO reported that several of the other departments
had rather lost confidence in the system. They were not clear
about end-year flexibility.
Sarah McCarthy Fry: If they are
not clear then I am sure we will make it clear to them. If that
is the reporting I was not aware of that. Could I just clarify
on the Whole of Government Accounts that it was quite right to
say that the nationalised banks are not consolidated. However,
our investment is accounted for in our own Treasury Resource Accounts
which obviously then form part of the Whole of Government Accounts.
It is just that they will not be consolidated in there.
Q558 Chairman:
So they will appear in the Whole of Government Accounts?
Sarah McCarthy Fry: But not consolidated
into them.
Q559 Chairman:
Is that not the point of Whole of Government Accounts? Is not
consolidation the whole point?
Sarah McCarthy Fry: Yes, but the
point we make is that we do not consider the nationalised banks
to be appropriate to be consolidated into the Whole of Government
Accounts.
11 Ev 112 Back
12
Ev 113 Back
13
Ev 106 Back
| 
