Accountability for Public Money

Further written evidence from H M Treasury

Accountability for Public Money

I am very conscious that the Treasury Minute in response to the PAC hearing on 19 January remains outstanding. I am writing to explain that it is likely to be delayed a little while longer.

The Treasury has of course already issued revised guidance on standards for Accounting Officers, as you know from my letter of 12 April. I also hope that, with ministers' agreement, it will be possible to issue a revised Code on corporate governance in central government before the summer Recess.

But the PAC's report of 5 April went further. You sought undertakings about accountability in Whitehall for local expenditure financed by public funds. As Gus O'Donnell and I said at the time, we share this very proper concern. The challenge now is to marry it up with the Government's commitment to localism.

I had hoped that Bob Kerslake's work would have reached a conclusion by now. But this is not straightforward policy development and it will take a little longer. I must therefore ask you to be patient while assuring you that you will see his report in draft later this year.

I can, however, tell you of another improvement in accountability which we

have in hand.

In order to help the PAC track implementation of its recommendations, we plan Treasury Minutes twice a year to report on progress in following through all the outstanding recommendations the PAC has made since the election. In cooperation with the NAG, we will encourage departments to work with their audit committees to develop reliable methodology which will give your Committee some assurance of the quality of the information in the reports. This will be a substantial additional service which I hope the PAC will find valuable. A 'Dear Accounting Officer' letter will set up the arrangements shortly.

I am copying this letter to Sir Gus O'Donnell and to Sir Bob Kerslake.

24 June 2011