DOCSLIB.ORG

Treasury Minutes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Treasury Minutes Treasury Minutes Government response to the Committee of Public Accounts on the Fourth to the Eleventh reports from Session 2017-19 Cm 9575 March 2018 Treasury Minutes Government response to the Committee of Public Accounts on the Fourth to the Eleventh reports from Session 2017-19 Presented to Parliament by the Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury by Command of Her Majesty Cm 9575 March 2018 TREASURY MINUTES DATED 1 MARCH 2018 TO THE COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS ON THE FOURTH TO THE ELEVENTH REPORTS FROM SESSION 2017-19 © Crown copyright 2018 This publication is licenced under the term of the Open Government Licence v.3.0 exceptwhereotherwisestated.Toviewthislicence,visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/ doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected]. Where we have identified any third party copyright information, you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/government/publications Anyenquiriesregardingthispublicationshouldbesenttousat: [email protected]. Print ISBN 978-1-5286- ID &&6 0/18 Printed in the UK by the APS Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum Government responses to the Committee of Public Accounts Session 2017-19 # Report Title Page 4 Clinical correspondence handling at NHS Shared Business Service 1 Department of Health and Social Care 5 Managing the costs of clinical negligence in hospital trusts 4 Department of Health and Social Care / Ministry of Justice / HM Treasury 6 Growing threat of online fraud 8 Home Office 7 Brexit and the UK border 12 HM Revenue and Customs / Home Office / HM Treasury 8 Mental health in prisons 15 Ministry of Justice / Department of Health and Social Care 9 Sheffield to Rotherham tram-trains 22 Department for Transport 10 High Speed 2 Annual Report and Accounts 26 Department for Transport 11 Homeless households 29 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government / Department for Work and Pensions Fourth Report of Session 2017-19 Department of Health and Social Care Clinical correspondence handling at NHS Shared Business Services Introduction from the Committee The Department of Health is ultimately responsible for securing value for money for spending on all health services. NHS England has responsibility for arranging the provision of health services in England and for commissioning their provision. This includes primary care support services, for example, updating patient registration lists, processing contractual payments to GPs and redirecting correspondence. Until April 2016, NHS England contracted NHS Shared Business Services (NHS SBS), a private company part owned by the Department, to make sure that misdirected clinical correspondence was sent on to the correct GP in the East Midlands, South West and North East London. In March 2016, NHS SBS informed NHS England and the Department that it had found a backlog of correspondence which had not been redirected, some of which dated back several years. A total of 709,000 items of correspondence were eventually found to have been mishandled. NHS SBS missed many opportunities over at least five years to identify and rectify the problem. Based on a report by the National Audit Office, the Committee took evidence, on 16 October 2017, from the Department of Health, NHS England, and NHS Shared Business Services. The Committee published its report on 29 November 2017. This is the Government response to the Committee’s report. NAO and PAC Reports • NAO Report: Clinical correspondence handling at NHS Shared Business Services - Session 2017-19 (HC 41) • PAC Report: Clinical correspondence handling at NHS Shared Business Services – Session 2017-19 (HC 396) Government responses to the Committee 1: PAC conclusion: NHS England failed to appreciate the seriousness of misdirected correspondence and still has not put effective measures in place to ensure clinical correspondence is handled properly. 1: PAC recommendation: NHS England should set out how it will ensure that all clinical correspondence is correctly handled, processed and redirected, where appropriate. 1.1 The Government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Recommendation implemented. 1.2 NHS England has put in place a service to ensure that any correspondence or material, sent to the Primary Care Support England service (Capita) by GP practices, who have not applied the correct process, is promptly reviewed and returned to the sender or the GP with whom the relevant patient is registered. Where this is not possible, arrangements are in place to redirect the correspondence to an appropriate organisation to deal with it. 2: PAC conclusion: NHS England does not know the full extent of the problem as it continues to identify new items of misdirected correspondence. 2: PAC recommendation: NHS England should set out by 31 December 2017 how it can be sure that all unprocessed correspondence has now been identified. 1 2.1 The Government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Recommendation implemented. 2.2 Primary Care Services England (PCSE), the service provided through Capita, have confirmed that all erroneous documentation held by them has now been identified and is being processed as part of the incident. The Primary Care Support (PCS) Incident Team is also undertaking a review, again in conjunction with PCSE, of other documentation to confirm that all other potential sources of unprocessed correspondence have been identified and processed. This will be completed by March 2018. 3: PAC conclusion: Eighteen months after the problem first came to light, NHS England still cannot confirm that no patients have been harmed by the repeated failures in the clinical correspondence redirection service. 3: PAC recommendation: NHS England should write to the Committee by 31 March 2018 to confirm the results of the review and what action it will take in response. 3.1 The Government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: April 2018. 3.2 NHS England plans to write to the Committee, following completion of clinical reviews planned for 31 March 2018, to advise the final outcome of the clinical review process. This will cover both the NHS Shared Business Services and Primary Care Support England clinical correspondence elements. 4: PAC conclusion: It is unacceptable that NHS England has given up trying to find out whether any patients have been harmed simply because 2,000 GPs have not confirmed whether they have reviewed clinical correspondence about their patients. 4: PAC recommendation: NHS England should obtain positive assurance by 31 March 2018 from every GP reviewing correspondence that they have completed their checks and whether they have identified any cases where patients may have been harmed. 4.1 The Government disagrees with the Committee’s recommendation. 4.2 The Government does not agree with the Committee’s conclusion that NHS England has “given up” trying to find out whether any patients have been harmed. Nor can NHS England force an individual GP to respond. However, it can, and has, put in place alternative arrangements where that is not forthcoming. 4.3 A rigorous process, including taking appropriate legal and clinical advice, was undertaken before making the original decision not to pursue these returns. Following the Committee’s hearing on 16 October 2017, NHS England has written to GPs again asking them to submit returns to the Incident Team for their affected patients by 31 January 2018. Where these have not been received, any monies paid for work not done will be reclaimed and, more importantly, clinical triage of the correspondence affecting those patients will be undertaken by NHS England clinicians. 5: PAC conclusion: Attempting to resolve misdirected clinical correspondence has so far cost an estimated £6.6 million and the total cost is still unknown. 5: PAC recommendation: NHS England should write to the Committee by 31 December 2017 to confirm how it will ensure that in future all contracts with third party suppliers include adequate compensation in the event of any failure to deliver; and how much it will cost to deal with the additional items of unprocessed clinical correspondence that have been found since the NAO report. 2 5.1 The Government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: March 2018. 5.2 Future contracts with third party providers will continue to contain strong provisions for redress in the event of failure to deliver. 5.3 The cost of managing the clinical correspondence incidents is estimated at £9 million by the end of the financial year 2017/18, of which £6.6 million relates to the NHS SBS incident. Financial recovery from NHS SBS has continued to plan. 6: PAC conclusion: The Department’s weak oversight of its joint venture with Sopra Steria, a private company, meant that opportunities to identify the issues at NHS SBS were repeatedly missed. 6: PAC recommendation: The Department should set out for the Committee how the changes it has made to the governance of its six investments will ensure that it has adequate arrangements in place to oversee the services being delivered by these organisations. 6.1 The Government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: December 2018. 6.2 The Department has already increased its membership of the NHS Share Business Services Board. In parallel, the company has therefore made organisational changes to ensure accurate assessment and reporting of risk is embedded in processes across the organisation, and made structural changes to the management of risk to ensure appropriate focus and timely reporting to the NHS SBS Management Team and the NHS SBS Main Board. 6.3 In November 2017, the Department established a new Governance Framework for DHSC Owned Companies. This includes a periodic review of all shareholdings and as part of this the Department’s holding of shares in NHS Shared Business Services will be reviewed late 2018.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • THE GREEN BOOK Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government
    THE GREEN BOOK Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government Treasury Guidance LONDON:TSO CONTENTS Page Page Contents iv Annex 1 Government intervention 51 Introduction 51 Preface v Economic efficiency 51 Chapter 1 Introduction and background 1 Equity 52 Introduction 1 Additionality 52 When to use the Green Book 2 Regeneration 54 Chapter 2 Overview of appraisal and Annex 2 Valuing non-market impacts 57 evaluation 3 Introduction 57 Introduction 3 Valuing non-market impacts 57 The appraisal and evaluation cycle 3 Current research/plausible estimates 59 The role of appraisal 3 Valuing environmental impacts 63 Process for appraisal and evaluation 4 Annex 3 Land and buildings 69 Presenting the results 6 Introduction 69 Managing appraisals and evaluations 7 Acquisition and use of property 69 Frameworks 8 Leases and rents 71 Issues relevant to appraisal and evaluation 9 Disposal of property 72 Chapter 3 Justifying action 11 Cost effective land use 72 Introduction 11 Annex 4 Risk and uncertainty 79 Reasons for government intervention 11 Introduction 79 Carrying out research 11 Risk management 79 Chapter 4 Setting objectives 13 Transferring risk 82 Introduction 13 Optimism bias 85 Objectives, outcomes, outputs and targets 13 Monte Carlo analysis 87 Irreversible risk 88 Chapter 5 Appraising the options 17 The cost of variability in outcomes 88 Introduction 17 Creating options 17 Annex 5 Distributional impacts 91 Valuing the costs and benefits of options 19 Introduction 91 Adjustments to values of costs and benefits 24 Distributional analysis 91
    [Show full text]
  • HM Revenues and Customs (148KB Pdf)
    FINANCE COMMITTEE CALL FOR EVIDENCE ON THE LAND AND BUILDINGS TRANSACTION TAX (SCOTLAND) BILL SUBMISSION FROM HM REVENUE & CUSTOMS 1. This submission is in response to the Committee’s invitation of 25 January 2013 to submit written evidence on the following specific issues: The transitional arrangements being made by HMRC with regards the operation of Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) and the switch over in Scotland to Land and Buildings Transactions Tax (LBTT); Liaison with Scottish Government (SG), Registers of Scotland (RoS) and Revenue Scotland over these arrangements; Costs associated with this ‘switch over’; and Outline of the present relationship with RoS in gathering SDLT in Scotland. 2. HMRC is responsible for the collection and management of UK taxes (other than those collected by local authorities). As such, it is responsible for SDLT, which currently applies to land transactions in the United Kingdom. Under provisions of the Scotland Act 2012, SDLT will be “switched off” in Scotland and replaced by a devolved tax, the LBTT. This is expected to apply from April 2015. The transitional arrangements being made by HMRC with regards the operation of SDLT and the switch over in Scotland to LBTT 3. Section 80J(2) of the Scotland Act 1998 (inserted by section 28 of the Scotland Act 2012) has the effect that LBTT cannot be charged on a land transaction if SDLT applies to it. Broadly this means that, if the effective date of a Scottish transaction (for SDLT purposes) is before the date on which SDLT is switched off in Scotland (the switch-off date) it will be subject to SDLT and if that date is on or after the switch-off date it will be subject to LBTT.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement by Chief Minister Re Meeting with HM Treasury
    STATEMENTS ON A MATTER OF OFFICIAL RESPONSIBILITY The Bailiff: Very well, we now come to statements. The first statement of which I have notice is a statement to be made by the Chief Minister regarding a meeting with Her Majesty’s Treasury on 27th November. 6. Statement by Chief Minister regarding a meeting with H.M. Treasury on 27th November 2008. 6.1 Senator F.H. Walker (The Chief Minister): Members will be aware that in his pre-budget report delivered last week the U.K. Chancellor of the Exchequer announced a review of the long term opportunities and challenges facing the Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories as financial centres which have been brought into focus by recent financial and economic events. We in Jersey have, of course, been here before with the Edwards Review in 1998. However, to some extent this time it is different. We are now experienced in the review process. We have already been fully reviewed by the I.M.F. in 2003 and at that time were found to be almost fully compliant with the then international standards of regulation. More recently we have engaged with a review of the Treasury Select Committee in their work on offshore centres. Even more recently we have just concluded a further review by I.M.F. teams looking into our compliance firstly with international standards of anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism; and secondly with prudential regulation under an I.M.F. review which includes matters of financial stability. We await their reports in due course.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Government and Frontline Performance Improvement
    CENTRAL GOVERNMENT AND FRONTLINE PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT: THE CASE OF “TARGETS” IN THE UNITED KINGDOM Steven Kelman, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government For over a decade, there has been a dramatic expansion in use of non-financial performance measures for government organizations. (Talbot 2005) Often, governments have limited themselves to what may be called “performance measurement” -- choosing measures and reporting performance against them. This has frequently, though not always, been the case in the United States, when performance measures have been developed at federal, state, and local levels; it is, for example, all the Government Performance and Results Act of l993 requires. In this situation, the words typically associated with the effort are “accountability” and “transparency.” Agency overseers, and the public, are made aware of whether performance is good or bad, and may then react accordingly (for instance, as with the Performance Assessment Review Team activities of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, by increasing or decreasing agency budgets). Other times, government organizations have gone beyond performance measurement to “performance management” – using measures as a tool to improve performance along dimensions measured, not just record performance levels assumed to be unchanging.1 The ability of performance management actually to improve performance is important for anyone interested in government working better. A particularly ambitious example of public-sector performance management has been the United Kingdom under the Labour government since l997, and especially after Labour’s first re- election in 200l. Starting in l998, departments negotiated “public service agreements” with the Treasury (the budget ministry) in conjunction with budget settlements.
    [Show full text]
  • Foreign and Commonwealth Office: Managing Risk in the Overseas Territories
    House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts Foreign and Commonwealth Office: Managing Risk in the Overseas Territories Seventeenth Report of Session 2007–08 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 31 March 2008 HC 176 Published on 1 May 2008 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Committee of Public Accounts The Committee of Public Accounts is appointed by the House of Commons to examine “the accounts showing the appropriation of the sums granted by Parliament to meet the public expenditure, and of such other accounts laid before Parliament as the committee may think fit” (Standing Order No 148). Current membership Mr Edward Leigh MP (Conservative, Gainsborough) (Chairman) Mr Richard Bacon MP (Conservative, South Norfolk) Angela Browning MP (Conservative, Tiverton and Honiton) Mr Paul Burstow MP (Liberal Democrat, Sutton and Cheam) Rt Hon David Curry MP (Conservative, Skipton and Ripon) Mr Ian Davidson MP (Labour, Glasgow South West) Mr Philip Dunne MP (Conservative, Ludlow) Angela Eagle MP (Labour, Wallasey) Nigel Griffiths MP (Labour, Edinburgh South) Rt Hon Keith Hill MP (Labour, Streatham) Mr Austin Mitchell MP (Labour, Great Grimsby) Dr John Pugh MP (Liberal Democrat, Southport) Geraldine Smith MP (Labour, Morecombe and Lunesdale) Rt Hon Don Touhig MP (Labour, Islwyn) Rt Hon Alan Williams MP (Labour, Swansea West) Phil Wilson MP (Labour, Sedgefield) The following were also Members of the Committee during the period of the enquiry: Annette Brooke MP (Liberal Democrat, Mid Dorset and Poole North) and Mr John Healey MP (Labour, Wentworth).
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Financial Regulation in the Crown Dependencies
    Review of Financial Regulation in the Crown Dependencies Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for the Home Department by Command of Her Majesty November 1998 Cm 4109-i Part 1 - Main Report £17.85 Cm 4109-ii Part 2 - The Jersey Finance Centre £10.30 Cm 4109-iii Part 3 - The Guernsey Finance Centre £12.60 Cm 4109-iv Part 4 - The Isle of Man Finance Centre £11.40 published by The Stationery Office as Part 1 ISBN 0 10 141092 1 Part 2 ISBN 0 10 141093 X Part 3 ISBN 0 10 141094 8 Part 4 ISBN 0 10 141095 6 Review of Financial Regulation in the Crown Dependencies OFFICE OF THE REVIEW OF FINANCIAL REGULATION IN THE CROWN DEPENDENCIES c/o Home Office 50 Queen Anne's Gate London SW1H 9AT Rt Hon Jack Straw MP Home Secretary Home Office 50 Queen Anne's Gate London SW1H 9AT 24 October 1998 Dear Home Secretary REPORT OF THE REVIEW OF FINANCIAL REGULATION IN THE CROWN DEPENDENCIES You commissioned me on 20 January 1998 to review with the Island authorities in Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man their laws, systems and practices for regulation of their international finance centres, the combating of financial crime and co- operation with other jurisdictions. I have pleasure in submitting my Report with this letter. As explained in Chapter 1, the Report consists of four Parts. Part I presents my own assessment. I take responsibility for what it says. It includes a two-page summary of Principal Issues followed by a full Summary and Main Conclusions and then the Main Report.
    [Show full text]
  • A Short Guide to HM Treasury July 2015 Overview Long-Term the Centre Financial Management of Government
    A Short Guide to HM Treasury July 2015 Overview Long-term The centre financial management of government | About this guide This short guide summarises what HM Treasury (the Treasury) does, the context within which it | Contact details works, how much it spends and its upcoming priorities and plans. This guide also sets out our view on the areas to look out for during the upcoming Parliament. In particular, the challenges of managing the public sector finances over the long term; and the need to enhance the effectiveness of the operations of the centre of government. If you would like to know more about the National Audit Office’s (NAO’s) work on HM Treasury, please contact: Nick Bateson BANK Director [email protected] 020 7798 7767 The National Audit Office scrutinises public spending for Parliament and If you are interested in the NAO’s work and support is independent of government. The Comptroller and Auditor General for Parliament more widely, please contact: (C&AG), Sir Amyas Morse KCB, is an Officer of the House of Commons and leads the NAO, which employs some 810 people. The C&AG Adrian Jenner certifies the accounts of all government departments and many other public sector bodies. He has statutory authority to examine and report Director of Parliamentary Relations to Parliament on whether departments and the bodies they fund have [email protected] used their resources efficiently, effectively, and with economy. Our 020 7798 7461 studies evaluate the value for money of public spending, nationally and locally. Our recommendations and reports on good practice For full iPad interactivity, please view this PDF help government improve public services, and our work led to Interactive in iBooks or GoodReader audited savings of £1.15 billion in 2014.
    [Show full text]
  • Rt. Hon. Mel Stride MP Financial Secretary to the Treasury and Paymaster General HM Treasury 1 Horse Guards Road London SW1A 2HQ
    The Helicon, One South Place, London EC2M 2RB, United Kingdom T: +44 (0) 20 7663 544 aicpaglobal.com | cimaglobal.com | aicpa.org | cgma.org Rt. Hon. Mel Stride MP Financial Secretary to the Treasury and Paymaster General HM Treasury 1 Horse Guards Road London SW1A 2HQ 27 February 2019 Association Response: HM Treasury Digital Services Tax Consultation Dear Financial Secretary, Thank you for the opportunity to express our views on the new proposed Digital Services Tax (DST). As you are aware, the Association recently produced a policy paper on the taxation of the digitalized economy that we have attached to this response. This paper sets out the Association’s broad thoughts on key issues around taxing the digitalized economy. The Association of International Certified Professional Accountants (the Association) is the most influential body of professional accountants, combining the strengths of the American Institute of CPAs (AICPA) and The Chartered Institute of Management Accountants (CIMA) to power opportunity, trust and prosperity for people, businesses and economies worldwide. It represents 667,000 members and students across 184 countries and territories in public and management accounting and advocates for the public interest and business sustainability on current and emerging issues. With broad reach, rigor and resources, the Association advances the reputation, employability and quality of CPAs, CGMAs and accounting and finance professionals globally. The AICPA regularly produces advice on global tax issues, debates and proposals. Recently the AICPA produced a framework guide on the principles of good tax policy, which can be viewed here:https://www.aicpa.org/content/dam/aicpa/advocacy/tax/downloadabledocuments/tax- policy-concept-statement-no-1-global.pdf This guide sets out and explains some of the guiding principles that make a good tax policy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Treasury Office of Accounts 1
    The Treasury Office of Accounts 1. Treasury Officers of Accounts (TAO), working for HM Treasury, the United Kingdom’s finance ministry, were first appointed in 1872 to assist those responsible for preparing appropriation accounts on technical points concerned with bookkeeping and accounts. From the outset, the TAO’s duties were closely linked with the development of the system of Parliamentary control of expenditure provided for in the Exchequer and Audit Departments Acts, and more recently the Government Resources and Accounts Act (Northern Ireland) 2001, and the detailed accounting and audit arrangements designed to secure that control. 2. Today, the Treasury Officer of Accounts is part of the Government Financial Management branch of the Treasury. The TAO’s immediate superior is represented on the HM Treasury’ board. The TAO and his/her team are the focal point for relations with the National Audit Office and the Committee of Public Accounts. T 3. The TOA is resonsible for maintaining an effective accounting and budgeting framework and promoting high standards of regularity, propriety and accountability. Specifically the TOA is responible for: • setting out a framework for financial control for Government Departments; • appointing Accounting Officers; • liasing with Parliament via the Committee of Public Accounts and the National Audit Office; and • providing guidance on financial control and conduct 4. In maintaining these responsibilities, the TOA provides guidance and advice to Departments through processes by: • maintaining an accounting manual – Government Accounting1 – and encouraging the production of timely and accurate accounts by Departments; • offering advice in the form of guidance documents on contentious issues, through Dear Accounting Officer2 letters (DAOs) and Principal Finance Officer letters covering issues such as accountability, propriety and value for money; 1 Available at http://www.government-accounting.gov.uk/current/frames.htm.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Recovery for Education
    Rt Hon Rishi Sunak MP The Chancellor of the Exchequer HM Treasury 1 Horse Guards Road London SW1A 2HQ Monday 29 June 2020 Re: Green Recovery for Education Dear Mr Sunak, As representatives of leading organisations from across the UK, we strongly support the case for a green recovery from COVID-19. We believe it is vital that any fiscal stimulus that Her Majesty's Government is planning also meets the test of helping bring forward the date of the UK becoming net-zero on our carbon emissions. Specifically, it is our view that the education estate should be prioritised for any fiscal stimulus investment. The education system can, and will, play a pivotal role in helping transition society towards a net-zero future, and the buildings the next generation are educated in must be at the heart of this. We understand that the Department for Education has applied for £30m funding from the Treasury to retrofit several schools to a net-zero standard as a pilot. We would very much like to see that funding approved, but do not believe the pilot should prevent more substantial investment in our education buildings as part of fiscal stimulus. Using fiscal stimulus to retrofit the educational estate to net-zero and nature positive would help HM Government ensure that any such investment is spread right across the country equitably, benefiting people regardless of class and ethnicity whilst helping to tackle to climate and ecological crises we face. Such a commitment would create tens of thousands of new green jobs, help reassure the youth of today that the Government is serious about stopping the climate emergency, and ensure that the UK education sector is seen as a global leader on climate and environmental action and education at COP26 next year.
    [Show full text]
  • Protocol Between the Home Office and the College of Policing Limited
    Protocol between the Home Office and the College of Policing Limited. Updated: July 2019 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction 3 Signatories 4 Purpose and Aims 5 Governance and Accountability 6 2. Ministerial Responsibilities 6 3. Permanent Secretary responsibilities 7 4. Home Office Senior Sponsor responsibilities 7 5. Responsibilities of the Sponsor 8 6. Responsibilities of the College of Policing Chief Executive Officer as 8 Accounting Officer 7. The College Board 10 8. Accountability 13 9. Annual Report and Accounts 14 10. Internal Audit 15 11. External Audit 15 Management and Financial Responsibilities 17 12. Management Responsibilities 17 13. Financial Responsibilities 17 14. Transparency and Information 20 15. College Staff 21 Status and Winding-up Arrangements 23 16. Tailored Review 23 17. Arrangements if the College is wound up 23 ANNEXES 24 Annex A – College Board Terms of Reference 24 Annex B – Spending Controls on the College 25 Annex C – Guidance Documents 28 Annex D – HOSU Process Notes 30 Annex E – Meeting Schedule Guide 31 2 PROTOCOL BETWEEN THE HOME OFFICE AND COLLEGE OF POLICING LIMITED Introduction The Protocol agreement is an essential part of the relationship between College of Policing Ltd. and its Home Office sponsor team. Sections 123 to 130 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 (“the ASB Act”) provide the legal basis for the powers of the College to set standards in policing. This protocol agreement provides further detail of the governance and funding of the College, the roles and responsibilities of the Secretary of State for the Home Department (‘the Home Secretary’) and the Chair and Chief Executive of the College, along with other Directors of the Board of the College, and officials working for the Home Office.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Ireland Office HC 255 30 June 2021
    ANNUAL REPORT AND ANNUAL REPORT AND ACCOUNTS 2013-14 ACCOUNTS 2020-21 Northern Ireland Office HC 255 30 June 2021 Date in Arial 16pt Northern Ireland Office Annual Report and Accounts 2020-21 (For the year ended 31 March 2021) Accounts presented to the House of Commons pursuant to Section 6(4) of the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000 Annual Report presented to the House of Commons by Command of Her Majesty Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 30 June 2021 HC 255 Northern Ireland Office Annual Report And Accounts 2020-21 This is part of a series of Departmental publications which, along with the Main Estimates 2021- 22 and the document Public Expenditure: Statistical Analyses 2020, present the Government’s outturn for 2020-21 and planned expenditure for 2021-22. © Crown copyright 2021 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government- licence/version/3. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/official-documents. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at Corporate Governance Team Northern Ireland Office Stormont House Belfast BT4 3SH Email: [email protected] ISBN - 978-1-5286-2644-6 CCS - 0521637386 06/21 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum Printed in the UK by the APS Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
    [Show full text]