Public Sector Re-organisation: Five Year Vision for the Public Sector

1240/5(2374)

WRITTEN QUESTION TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE POLICY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE

BY DEPUTY G.C.L. BAUDAINS OF ST. CLEMENT

ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON TUESDAY 5th APRIL 2005

Question

The Committee's proposition on Public Sector Re-organisation: Five Year Vision for the Public Sector' (P.58/2004) was adopted by the States on 26th May 2004.

1. Paragraph (a) ofthe proposition stated that the purpose of the re-organisationwas to seek savings of£20m. and value improvements' of £9m.perannum. Will thePresidentadvisewhethertheofferof final salary pensions andindex linking of them to new employees will bereviewedas part ofthose savings and, ifnot, why not?
2. Paragraph (d) enabled a reduction of upto 300 posts to beachievedbyvariousmeansandtheaccompanying report stated, atparagraph 4, that it is expected that the public sector will reduce by approximately 300 posts over a 5 year period'.

In  answers to oral  questions  on  1st March 2005, the  President  intimated  that  there might  be no post

reductions. Would the President therefore advise –

( i) w h ether the Committee has abandoned this goal?

( ii ) how the Committee justifies an expanding public sector headcount at a time of reducing private sector

workforce and possible population reduction also?

3. Under the Red tape reform' initiative, Committees have recently been seeking examples from interested parties ofareaswherebureaucracy might bereduced.

D  oes the Committee accept that asking people to, effectively, examine their own efficiency is unlikely to

achieve any real benefit towards achieving either the savings or value improvement goals in the visioning proposals and will the Committee therefore consider using part of the £9.4m. set aside for achieving the proposals to employ external persons to undertake efficiency/streamlining auditing?

Answer

"(a) I confirm that the public sector pension scheme is not being considered in the context of the £20 million

efficiency savings that have been highlighted in P.58/2004. However, I am able to assure the Deputy that the financing of the Public Employees Contributory Retirement Scheme is kept under constant review. In this context, an actuarial review is due to be held this year and the Policy and Resources Committee will be looking closely at the outcome of that review.

I t is important for the Deputy to note that index linking is not guaranteed for new employees. Whilst the

policy of the Committee of Management of the Scheme has been to seek to pay pension increases in line with adjustments in the Retail Price Index, this will only occur where employer and employee representatives agree that the funding of the scheme is sufficient to allow this to happen.

2. (i) First, it isimportant to note that I did notsuggest in myresponseof 1st March that no post savings would arise as a result of P.58/2004. What I pointed out was that the total number will become clearer as the ChangeProgramme is implementedand that it isenvisaged that they will not exceed 300.However, I confirm that the principal policy objective isto deliver £20 million in savings from publicsector expenditure over a 5 year period.

( i i) R e c ent increases in headcount can be attributed to the front-line services of Health, Education,

Police and Prison where specific service requirements led to increases in staff. These increase have, however, already been partially offset by reductions elsewhere. The Change Programme described in (i) will result in further post reductions in back office and other non-frontline operational staff. In this connection, the Committee's policy continues to be one of reducing posts by means other than compulsory redundancy wherever possible, for example through natural wastage.

3. The Red Tape Reform project isone facet of the programme to improve the efficiency of the public sector. In accordance with P.134/2004,the project is aimedatreforming legislation and regulation, although,during the consultation process,when the public and organisations were invited to highlightareaswhichcouldbe improved, issues unrelated to regulatory reform were also raised. In parallel, public sector employeeswere also encouraged to highlightareasofunnecessarybureaucracy and inefficiency. The response has been good and the suggestions are currently being considered anddealt with as part ofthewiderdriveforimproved efficiency.

A  s well as internal staff seconded from States departments, the Change Programme, which is responsible for

reviewing processes and performance across the organisation, already has access to the services of external consultants with specific expertise where necessary.