COMMITTEE FOR REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Committee Office Room 402
Parliament Buildings
Belfast
BT4 3XX
Tel: 02890 521970
Fax: 02890 525927
Email committee.regionaldevelopment@niassembly.gov.uk

Danny Kennedy, MLA
Chairperson
Committee for the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister
Northern Ireland Assembly
Parliament Buildings
Stormont
Belfast
BT4 3XX

28 November 2007

Dear Danny,

1. Following Committee consideration of the draft Programme for Government and draft Investment Strategy at its meetings of 7 November, 14 November and 21 November 2007, the Committee would make the following response to the request by the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister for committee views.

Draft Programme for Government/PSA Framework

2. The Department has responsibility for delivering PSAs that contribute to each of the five priority areas identified by the Executive in the draft PfG. The Committee supports the five priorities, and in particular, the Committee notes and commends the inclusion of the priority to Protect and enhance our environment and natural resources.
3. In addition to the role infrastructure plays as a driver of economic development and social inclusion underpinning many of the Executive’s key goals, the Committee notes a number of key goals for which the Department has explicit responsibility, including

Priority 1 – Growing a dynamic, innovative economy	Infrastructure has been identified as a key driver of economic growth and productivity, a critical factor in competitiveness and in the decisions of FDI in the choice of host locations. DRD contributes to the achievement of this priority through its investment in roads and public transport, and its management of policy in relation to water and sewerage services, ports and airports.
Priority 2 – Promote tolerance, inclusion and health and well-being	Goal 10 - Reducing by 33% the overall number of people, and by 50% the number of children, killed or seriously injured.
Priority 3 – Protect and enhance our environment and natural resources	Goal 5 – Delivering a new sewer project for central Belfast by 2010.
Priority 4 – Invest to build our infrastructure	Goal 2 – Investing £3.1bn in our road network by 2018. Goal 3 – Investing £1.4bn in our water and waste water infrastructure by 2018.
Priority 5	Goals 1, 2, 3, and 5. – Achieving 5% efficiency savings on administration costs for the next 3 years; delivering 3% per annum on resource budgets; contributing to the generation of an extra £1bn capital realisation; and streamlining department and agency websites by 2009.

4. The Committee is of the view that, with 38 goals, it would not be helpful to add to the list at this time. However, it may be useful if, in future revisions of the Programmes for Government, the centrality of environmentally sustainable infrastructure and connectivity were made more explicit and given higher priority.
5. In terms of the SMARTness and achievability of the existing goals, those that are explicitly within the remit of the Department are, on the whole, SMART.  
6. The Committee notes with some concern that the road safety targets for percentage reductions in those killed and seriously injured (ksi) are not new. Although road conditions are responsible for a small proportion of ksi incidents on our roads, the Committee is firmly of the view that reductions in this area will not be achievable without adequate funding for structural road maintenance and local traffic measures.  
7. The achievability of those goals at priority four - investing £3.1bn in our road network by 2018 and investing £1.4bn in our water and waste water infrastructure by 2018, are dependent on the availability of funding outside the current Budget period. The Committee is supportive of these goals; however their achievability is dependent on potential funding allocations by a future Executive.
8. The Committee notes that, of the five strategic and interrelated priority areas identified by the Executive, one priority Growing a dynamic and innovative economy is identified as the top priority. This is followed a discussion of the cross-cutting themes of A better future and Sustainability, which the Executive states will underpin delivery of their priorities.  
9. In its analysis of the discourse on A better future, the Committee had some concerns in relation to the meaning and force of some of the language used in the commitments outlined. For example ‘ … fairness, inclusion and equality of opportunity will be watchwords for all our policies and programmes.’ The following paragraph states that the Executive has an overarching responsibility ‘ … to proactively change the existing patterns of social disadvantage by using increased prosperity and economic growth to tackle ongoing poverty.’
10. It is unclear to the Committee what force, if any, attaches to a cross-cutting theme or a watchword, particularly in light of the second quote above which suggests that the proceeds of prosperity and growth, when achieved, will be used to tackle ongoing poverty, rather than seeking to grow and prosper in a way that begins to address poverty. 
11. NICVA, in its evidence to the Committee noted that A Shared Future has become A better future with no definition of what the watchwords of fairness, inclusion and equality of opportunity might mean. NICVA was also critical of what it saw as the trickledown assumptions inherent in the approach used in the Programme for Government.  
12. On the issue of sustainability, the Committee is of the view that a radically different approach is required if Northern Ireland is to play its part in achieving the 60-80% reduction in carbon emissions outlined by the Prime Minister in his speech on 19 November 2007. NICVA, in its evidence to the Committee, highlighted the imbalance between spending on roads in comparison to planned spending on public transport and what it saw as the small consideration of carbon emissions in transport. The Committee is of the view that the issue is not simply one of bus and rail versus roads. Much of our public transport is bus based, and improvement in our roads means improvements in bus journey times, further enhancing the carbon efficiency of bus journeys. For the Committee, a more useful discussion is one that focuses on the carbon emissions of the different modes of transport, and it would welcome consideration of green energy and hybrid based modes of public transport within this mix.  
13. Again, as a cross cutting theme, it is not clear to the Committee what force, if any, sustainability has in terms of implementation. Although PSA 22 refers to reducing our carbon footprint, it does not contain an explicit carbon emissions reductions action or target, nor does DRD have a target in this area.  
14. The Department for Regional Development has 8 priorities spread over four PSAs. Of these, it has sole responsibility for the delivery of two, has responsibility as shareholder for a third, and shares the fourth with the Department for the Environment, which is in the lead. It is the view of the Committee that for the Department for Regional Development, lines of responsibility are clear.  

Draft Investment Strategy

15. As a stand alone document the draft Investment Strategy’s pillars and sub pillars structure, together with the cross-cutting objectives, provides a clear matrix within which to think about infrastructure investment. The ISNI states its aims are within the PfG, however it is not clear whether the ISNI pillars and cross-cutting themes matrix refers to activities within Priority 4 – Invest to build our infrastructure or to all infrastructure investment under any of the Executives priorities. Therefore, it is the view of the Committee that this matrix is insufficiently aligned to the five priorities and two cross-cutting themes identified by the Executive in the Programme for Government. The 23 sub-pillars, in the case of the Department for Regional Development, closely align with the budget objectives, which is not surprising as years 1-3 of the ISNI map to the Budget period, but it is not sufficiently clear how these relate to the 23 PSAs.  
16. The Committee is of the view that, given the indicative nature of funding for the ISNI beyond year three, the key goals are aspirational. This is at odds with the role of the ISNI as a strategic forward look at infrastructure needs, however it may be inevitable if the ISNI is tied to the Budget. This is problematic as the infrastructure industries and others will be seeking clarity and certainty in order to prepare to compete for forthcoming government business.  
17. The nature of infrastructure projects is that there is a long lead and development time, in many cases outside the three year budget period, a fact which contributes to the aspirational nature of the key goals. This means that most of the milestones contained in the ISNI of relevance to the Committee for Regional Development refer to projects already well advanced. In some respects, this means that commitments are being made on those projects which are on the way to being delivered, and the observer may be tempted to ask where the challenge for departments lies.  
18. The Environment pillar makes reference to investment in Water and Waste Water infrastructure. The Committee is of the view that until the Executive has made decisions on the outstanding Strand One issues, and Strand Two of the Independent Water Review has been published, it is not in a position to make further comment on the proposals in this pillar.
19. The Committee again highlights the lack of discussion in the final ISNI of carbon emissions in the Networks pillar, although the Measure Investment Proposals submitted as part of the ISNI bidding process devoted considerable attention to this topic. Turning to the Environment pillar, the discussion is limited to consideration of water and waste water compliance with EU Directives, rather than any fuller consideration of carbon footprint of all our investment activities.

Programme for Government and Investment Strategy Information and Process

20. The Committee understands that, because of the timing of restoration, the Programme for Government, ISNI and Budget process for this year has been somewhat shorter than normal. However the time scale this year was too short to allow sufficient time for Committee consideration and the Assembly process.
21. The Committee would like to see clarification, simplification and harmonisation of the terminology used in the Programme for Government, the Investment Strategy, and the Budget.  
22. Within the Programme for Government there is one overarching aim, five strategic and interrelated priorities of which one is the top priority, two cross-cutting themes and 38 goals, in addition to 23 PSAs, encompassing 95 objectives above a myriad of actions and targets.  
23. Within the Investment Strategy, which it states shares the overarching aim of the Programme for Government, there are six investment pillars encompassing 23 sub-pillars.
24. Within the Budget, each department’s DEL is split between capital and investment, which are delineated into objectives labelled by a letter rather than an activity, although they should align with the Department’s objectives, and below that into spending areas. The spending areas align closely with the sub-pillars of the Investment Strategy because of the relationship between the capital budget and the ISNI. However the departmental objectives used to organise the Budget are at a different level to the objectives used in the PSAs and differ again from the PSAs themselves.
25. The Committee is of the view that aligning the PSAs more closely with the Budget documents (Departmental objectives and spending areas) would allow Committees to assess what their Department is to achieve with the funding allocated to it, which would in turn enhance ongoing Committee scrutiny. 
26. There is also the question of the hierarchy and relationship between the PSA objectives and targets in the PSA annex to the PfG and the key goals listed in the PfG. This is not clear, nor is it clear that when a commitment is given to monitoring and reporting on progress, what exactly is to be monitored and reported on.
27. It is the view of the Committee that the Departmental Position Report and Executive Position Report stages of the budget process under the previous Assembly provided useful and timely information to Committees and should be a feature in the process for next year. In addition to the alignment of budget allocations to priorities and actions, the publication of an annual report illustrating both spend and delivery would begin to provide the information needed by Committees and the Assembly to discharge their scrutiny and advisory functions.
28. On behalf of the Committee for Regional Development, I would thank you and the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister for your co-ordination work on the draft Programme for Government and draft ISNI. I am forwarding a copy of this letter to the Minister for Regional Development.

 

Yours sincerely,

Fred Cobain
Chairperson
Committee for Regional Development