Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): From the Department of Finance, I welcome to the meeting Tony Simpson, who is the deputy secretary of strategic policy and reform; Wendy Lecky, who is the director of the strategic policy and reform division; and Sarah Wilson, who is also from the strategic policy and reform division.

There is a multiplicity of papers for the session: a cover note from the Committee Clerk; previous briefing material from the Department; the OECD's 'Report on the Implementation of the OECD Recommendation on Principles for Independent Fiscal Institutions', which members of the previous Committee for Finance will have scrutinised at some length; and the previous Committee's inquiry report, if you can bear to go back and read the utterances from me and Steve Aiken from 2021.

Dr Aiken: And Mr Frew, Chair.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): And Mr Frew, of course.

Mr Frew: From 2021? I am far too young for that. [Laughter.]

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): The Department provided an updated briefing paper subsequent to the production of the meeting pack, and that can be found in members' packs.

I invite the officials to make a brief, if possible, opening statement, after which we will have questions. Thank you.

Mr Tony Simpson (Department of Finance): Good afternoon, Chair, Deputy Chair and members. We welcome the opportunity to meet today to update you on the progress of the Fiscal Council Bill. I am delighted to be joined by colleagues who have been leading on the work: Wendy Lecky, who, as you said, is the director of the strategic policy and reform division, and Sarah Wilson, who is a deputy director in the division and who leads the Fiscal Council Bill sponsorship team.

I trust that members have had an opportunity to read the latest update. With your permission, Chair, in order to set the scene, I thought that it would be useful to provide some brief background on the Fiscal Council's establishment and outputs to date, before updating you on where we are at with drafting the legislation.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Yes, but I ask that you be relatively brief, because we will have the Fiscal Council in front of us fairly soon.

Mr Simpson: OK.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): In the nicest possible way, I will say that it can tell us what it is doing. We need to know about the legislative provisions in order to give it permanence. Do make it brief.

Mr Simpson: I will skip the background on the council's progress and move straight to the legislation.

The Minister provided an update on the Bill to the Committee Chair in June. That included providing a copy of the agreed policy document. From that, the Committee will be aware that the Bill has been included in the Executive's legislative programme for this year. The aim is for drafting to be completed before the end of this calendar year, all being well. As you will appreciate, however, the timings for introduction depend on how quickly the details of the Bill can be settled.

In addition, the legislative programme needs to be managed across the Executive as a whole. Engagement between the Bill team and the Office of the Legislative Counsel (OLC) is ongoing, particularly on various details of the council's specific functions. It is inevitably taking some time to ensure that the underpinning legislation will be clear, robust and unambiguous. The OLC has indicated that it aims to provide a further draft of the clauses in the coming weeks to our Bill team for its consideration. It is anticipated that some further matters of detailed policy, in addition to those relating to the functions of the council, are likely to necessitate some further examination and clarification between us and the OLC.

The Department will seek to introduce the legislation in the Assembly as soon as is reasonably possible. As we continue to work in collaboration with the OLC and the Departmental Solicitor's Office (DSO) through the drafting/instructing process, we will, of course, keep the Committee updated. We will welcome the Committee's engagement throughout the process. As you said, Chair, we will share the draft Bill once it is available. We are more than happy to attend the Committee throughout the process to discuss it. That is a very short and, hopefully, brief enough update on where we are at with the Bill.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): That was admirably brief. Much appreciated, Tony. On the timing, the Executive were quite clear that there were Bills in the legislative programme that were due to be introduced in this calendar year, but, if I am given to understand your evidence, there is no longer certainty that the Fiscal Council Bill will be introduced in 2024.

Mr Simpson: There is not certainty on its being introduced in this calendar year. As I said, the aim is to have the drafting completed in the calendar year so that the Bill is ready for introduction in this financial year.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): The end of the March is therefore the new target.

The Fiscal Council Bill was first committed to by Conor Murphy when he was Finance Minister, in, I think, either 2020 or 2021. The previous Finance Committee did a lot of work on the context and took lots of evidence from the Department. Would I be being unreasonable if I were to say that there has been a lot of discussion already? The legislation should be relatively uncontroversial, as a lot of work on it happened in the previous mandate. Why is it taking so long?

Mr Simpson: We are just trying to ensure that the language in the Bill is precise. There are a number of elements in the terms of reference for which, through engagement with the OLC, we wanted to make sure that there was that precision, in order to have very clear legislation. The legislation is not something that can simply be transcribed from legislation for fiscal councils across the water. We need something similar, but there are unique circumstances in Northern Ireland that mean that we need to ensure that the legislation is future-proofed, and there were discussions between us and the OLC and the Fiscal Council itself. For example, the proposed Bill covers every possible circumstance for who might bring forward a Budget, be it an NIO Minister or a local Minister, and there are timings and definitions to be looked at. There are particular elements that we are seeking to refine.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): All of that was known in 2021 and 2022.

Mr Simpson: Some of this has come to light during our engagement and discussions with the OLC. Obviously, we could begin the formal drafting process only after the Minister and the Executive agreed the policy paper, which happened in June. We undertook as much preparatory work as we could in the years before that. Although it is reasonable to assume that that work would be further advanced, in another way, it is well advanced, because OLC colleagues agreed with us, at risk, to begin the drafting process, so we are not starting from scratch.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): They did it "at risk" before the institutions returned?

Mr Simpson: Yes. As much as possible was done, but the final policy position needed to be confirmed by the Finance Minister and the Executive.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): When you say "drafting", is the OLC drafting the actual Bill —

Mr Simpson: Yes.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): — or draft provisions? OK.

Mr Simpson: Some of them. When the Executive agreed the policy position, we did not have to go to the OLC with a policy paper.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): There is a draft Bill, however.

Mr Simpson: Yes. Significant work has been undertaken to date, but we are seeking to refine the detail with OLC colleagues.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): What are the other things that have given you pause for thought or that have caused you more work?

Mr Simpson: Some of the definitions. For example, the terms of reference agreed after the New Decade, New Approach (NDNA) agreement are not precise enough for the type of language that is needed to describe the meaning of, for example, "sustainability". There are annual Budgets, but what happens if the Budget timetable slips? Those are two examples, but there is also the aforementioned issue of who might take a Budget through the legislative process. Those are some of the areas in which we have tried to nail down the precision and make sure that the legislation is as future-proofed as it can be to meet any changing circumstances.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Has the Bill's introduction been affected by work on the Budget sustainability plan, which we are due to be briefed on later. Will any of the other post-restoration work in the Department, such as the Budget sustainability plan, as I mentioned, the new Joint Exchequer Committee (JEC), the interim Public Service Transformation Board (PSTB) and the various other strands of work, delay the development of your legislation in any way?

Mr Simpson: No. The Department obviously has a significant number of priorities that it is trying to advance. We have a separate Bill team working on it. With the restoration of the Executive, we have staffed it up again. We did not keep a Bill team in place when there was no Executive, and work on that was delayed, but no is the answer to your question.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): I will open up the meeting to questions.

Ms Forsythe: Thank you for coming to speak to us about the Bill. Can you provide some detail on the independence of the Fiscal Council in the Bill? Can you give us some clarity on where that sits at the minute?

Mr Simpson: You can ask the Fiscal Council chair for his view, but our view is that the Fiscal Council has been operating fully independently of the Department to date.

One of the key focuses of the legislation will be on underpinning that independence in legislation, but, yes, the Bill's intent is to give the Fiscal Council a very broad remit so that it can assess the sustainability of Northern Ireland finances and examine the Budget process. It is, however, up to the chair and the council to determine their own work plan, what they are going to report on and the nature of their work without there being any interference at all from the Department.

Ms Wendy Lecky (Department of Finance): The legislation will be based on that, which links back to the OECD principles for international fiscal institutions.

Ms Forsythe: That is brilliant. Thank you. Clarity on the Fiscal Council's independence, and the perception of its independence, is so important if we are to take the step of moving forward with the Bill. What costs do you think will be involved to run the Fiscal Council?

Mr Simpson: At the moment, the council's budget is in and around the £600,000 mark. We need to consider whether its costs will change once it becomes a statutory body. For example, will there be some functions for which the council will rely on Civil Service support, such as HR support and financial support, or will that be done in-house? Will the council need a link back to the Department? We will need to consider such things as the council moves forward. I do not need to tell members about the pressures on the Budget generally and on the Department in particular. We have sought to protect as much as possible of the council's budget so that it can undertake its duties, and the Committee may well pick up on that with the chair when he gives evidence next week.

Ms Lecky: We are working with the council on those considerations. As it moves to being a statutory body, as Tony talked about, what corporate functions, for example, might it have to take on and what additional staff and resources might it need?

Ms Forsythe: Absolutely. Given the tight Budget situation that we are in, it is easy to turn away from setting up something new after looking at the cost involved. It is therefore good to see that the draft legislation is progressing and will be coming to the Executive, because the role that the council plays in advising on our overall finances is so important.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): I strongly agree with that. I have been a robust advocate of the council for years, in part because it will provide not just a political — not with a capital P — scrutiny role but, you would think, a degree of certainty to the public and, indeed, to investors that, should our institutions collapse again, there will still be some robust oversight of our finances.

Dr Aiken: Tony, you said that the OLC said that there are further policy implications. Is that significant, or is it just a matter of drafting and getting language correct?

Mr Simpson: The latter.

Dr Aiken: There is therefore nothing fundamentally significant.

Mr Simpson: No fundamental concerns are being raised in our discussions with the OLC. For the definitions of the council's functions, it is just about the legislation having the required precision.

Dr Aiken: Its funding will probably come under the transformation agenda, because the council is absolutely essential in order for us to be able to understand our finances and where we are at. The question of finance therefore needs to be ironed out fairly quickly, because we need to understand, when the Bill goes through, what overall impact it is likely to have. I fully agree with the Chair that funding needs either to be ring-fenced or built into the whole transformation process, because that is a vital way of ensuring that the council is not starved of resources. Otherwise, there is no point in doing this.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Indeed. Do you want to respond to that?

Mr Simpson: No, we are not looking at it separately under the transformation agenda, but there is a core line in my directorate's budget for the Fiscal Council. We engage monthly with the council secretariat on its needs, and, as I said, we have sought to protect it from any budgetary pressures. As far as we are aware, it is comfortable with the level of resourcing that it has had. We will keep a watching brief on that in our regular discussions with the council.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): It will therefore be funded directly by the Assembly, a bit like the Audit Office.

Dr Aiken: That is what I was getting to.

Mr Simpson: It is set up as a non-departmental public body (NDPB). We have looked at the classification, and the funding for it flows through the Department rather than directly from the —.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): I appreciate that that is the way in which it was set up in 2020 or 2021. I may be asking you to make a policy judgement that is unreasonable, but has the Department looked at whether it would be more appropriate to underpin its independence by making it a directly funded entity of the Assembly? For example, would it be more appropriate to make it a little bit more like the Audit Office, for which the Audit Committee has a direct scrutiny function? There would then be complete transparency with its accounts, and the public could see that Caesar's wife, as it were, is living up to the expectations that it is asking of Departments.

Mr Simpson: We looked at the appropriate classification earlier. I will let Sarah comment on that.

Ms Sarah Wilson (Department of Finance): When we were drafting the policy document, we considered how we would set it up. In doing so, we determined that that is not just a decision for the Department. It goes through a process, whereby we look at the classification. It then goes to the Office for National Statistics (ONS) for it to make a judgement as well. The feedback from the ONS was that, because the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) is set up in that way — the Scottish model is slightly different — it felt that the classification should remain similar and that the council should therefore be classified as an NDPB. In that respect, having received that feedback, we have made the judgement that the classification should be as the ONS has recommended.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Is the Scottish Fiscal Commission (SFC) set up differently?

Ms Wilson: It is set up slightly differently because of the way in which Scotland's Government is set up. It is set up as a non-ministerial —. Sorry, but I will have to check that before providing more detail.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): I just want to come back to you on that. In one sense, you could say that the SFC is more closely aligned with our model than the OBR is, in that the OBR is a sovereign entity that does economic forecasts. I will come back to the point about economic forecasts, but I now want to bring in other members.

Mr Frew: I will keep to the themes of independence and the finances that are involved. Why do you think that the cost of the Fiscal Council will go up simply because of its being placed on a statutory footing?

Mr Simpson: At the moment, the council's corporate functions, including its HR and finance functions, are supported through the Department. As it becomes an independent body, we and the council will need to look at how it wants to receive that corporate support. Would it like to run those corporate functions in-house or would it like support from the Department? If those functions were to be brought in-house, there would be an additional cost for the council. That would reduce demand on the Department, so, in one way, some costs for the council could go up and other costs for us could go down. We therefore need to look at how those functions are delivered.

Mr Frew: If it is to be purely independent, surely the council would want those functions to be in-house. How could you have a Fiscal Council with seconded Department of Finance officials working in it?

Mr Simpson: There could be a mix. Again, that will be for the council to determine. There could be a mix of permanently appointed staff and seconded staff. There are therefore questions about who the staff are and how individuals are recruited and appointed. There is then the bread and butter of the payroll and HR functions. I suspect that other bodies across the water have a similar mix of directly appointed staff and secondees from the Administration. There is an advantage to having in some secondees, because they have an understanding of the system from the inside. Once the council is established in statute, however, we will need to discuss how it wants to staff its organisation. In order to ensure its independence, we will be looking for direction from the Fiscal Council itself, as opposed to the Department suggesting how the council should staff its organisation.

Mr Frew: I take it that the provision in the Bill will be that the financial burden for the Fiscal Council will be met directly out of the Department of Finance's budget?

Mr Simpson: Yes.

Mr Frew: In its entirety?

Mr Simpson: Yes.

Mr Frew: Are there any safeguards that can be added to allow transparency and to create a barrier from pressure? Are there any best-case models from Scotland or Wales?

Mr Simpson: There will be reporting requirements on the council. It will have to report its annual accounts. Sarah can correct me if I am wrong. It will have to report its budget and staffing levels, so there will be transparency around the level of resource that it is given. It will have to produce annual accounts, annual reports and so on.

Ms Wilson: It is already in legislation that the Department is required to fund the council. There therefore cannot be a decision taken to remove the funding.

Mr Frew: There is a requirement for the Department to fund the council. What happens if the Fiscal Council asks for an uplift but the Department says, because of budgetary pressures, that it cannot maintain that level of funding or that it cannot grant the uplift this year? That could then affect the Fiscal Council's work. Let me put it in a more draconian way. What would happen if the Fiscal Council were to produce a report that the Department of Finance did not like, and then, all of a sudden, the next year, its budget is cut?

Mr Simpson: The legislation safeguards its independence. It sets out the functions that the council needs to deliver, so there is an obligation on the Department to ensure that it is appropriately funded to enable it to do that.

Ms Wilson: It is not just a case of the Department setting the budget. There is always a discussion with the council. That is similar to the way that the Audit Office accounts are looked at: there is a discussion at the Committee about what it wants versus what is available. It is a two-way process, so if the council wanted to increase its work, which came with an increased cost, and the estimates presented were reasonable, this Committee would probably come back to us to say, "Why are you not funding it?". The scrutiny will be there from us, as a Department, and the council will bring forward issues if it feels that we are restricting its abilities.

Mr Frew: Is the Audit Office not one of those organisations that repeatedly states that it does not have enough funding?

Ms Wilson: The Audit Office comes to the Committee and asks for additional funding, and the Committee has to consider the arguments and make a judgement. It is exactly the same process. Our colleagues in DOF provide input in that process, so the process for the Fiscal Council will be exactly the same: it will put forward what it requires, and there will then be that two-way process of dialogue.

The Department and the permanent secretary are very mindful of protecting the budget. They have done so to date, and there have not been any cuts. We will continue to do that because we recognise the invaluable and significant work that the council has done. I anticipate that continuing, and I am sure that the Committee will agree that it should continue.

Mr Frew: Will there be anything in the Bill that produces a connection with the Audit Office, such as a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that details exactly where the Fiscal Council and Audit Office sit? I worry about duplication of work, which would cost us.

Ms Wilson: We have put in place a number of memoranda of understanding across Departments and with the Northern Ireland Office, and we anticipate that there will be further ones down the road. Obviously, we can suggest to the council that it should consider doing that, and there is dialogue with the Audit Office, but we would not want to direct it. We certainly could say that it is something that came up in Committee that it should consider, and it could take that forward if it felt that it would be useful.

Mr Frew: If the Department of Finance or the Minister had a view on where both organisations sit, surely you could put that into legislation to make it a statutory requirement.

Mr Simpson: Our intention, in our work with OLC colleagues, is to be clear and precise about the role of the council, separate from any other organisation. We need to be precise on the role of the council to look at Northern Ireland's overall finances and their sustainability. Obviously, the Audit Office has a different role.

Ms Wilson: As part of the process, we have also looked at the legislation that established the Audit Office and the Comptroller and Auditor General. That has been taken into account so that we do not put any functions in that they are doing as well. OLC has been very helpful in making sure that we dovetail those two pieces of legislation, and it is something that we will bring back to it to make sure that that continues. We have been mindful of that.

Regarding the OBR legislation, for example, there is the same piece of legislation for the Audit Office, which then runs into the OBR legislation. We have been mindful of that throughout the process so that we do not overlap or take on additional duties that are not within the remit of the council.

Mr Frew: What powers will the Fiscal Council have to summon people and papers?

Mr Simpson: Access to information is a key element of the legislation. The key elements are the council's independence and ability to access information. At the moment, we have MOUs with all Departments to ensure that there is an appropriate flow of information. As far as we are aware, the council is satisfied with the information that it is getting from all Departments. That will be copper-fastened in the legislation, so there will be an obligation on Departments to provide the information that the council needs to perform its duties.

Mr Frew: What will that process look like? If there is prevarication or barriers are put in place, is there an appeal mechanism through which they can call you up?

Ms Lecky: The MOU stipulates that if there are any issues with officials giving the council information, they can be escalated to the permanent secretary.

Mr Frew: Of the Department?

Ms Lecky: Yes, of the Department. They can also come to us — the Department of Finance — as the lead sponsor, and we will try to resolve it through that mechanism. We are going to look again at the MOUs when the body is in statute. We will review the MOUs that are already there and amend them as necessary.

Mr Frew: This Committee has the power to summon. Will there be similar powers for the Fiscal Council?

Mr Simpson: My understanding is that there will be for information. It does not sit as a committee, as you do, and summon officials, but if it needs clarification or meetings with senior officials from Departments, we expect that to be facilitated. How will that information be defined? The Bill will set out the nature of the financial information that the council will require so that it is able to discharge its duties. It will be very clear to Departments what they will need to provide to the council, and they will need to comply with any requests.

Mr Frew: OK, thank you.

Miss Brogan: Thank you for your presentation. What impact has the Fiscal Council had already, without being on a statutory footing? How important has it been? Following on from Paul's questions, what risks do you foresee if the Bill does not proceed and the Fiscal Council is not put on a statutory footing?

Mr Simpson: The council has had a significant impact. In the short time that it has been in existence, it has produced around 20 reports, which, from a standing start, is a significant output from the organisation. One of its most significant pieces of work, which has had a major impact for us, was on relative need in Northern Ireland. That informed the interim fiscal framework that the Finance Minister signed in recent months. Prior to that work, we did not have that evidence base of the extent of relative need in Northern Ireland, so it is having a tangible impact on the resources that are available to the Executive.

Some of its other reports have pointed to how we can improve transparency in our monitoring processes, such as our monitoring rounds. Part of the work in the Budget sustainability plan that is under development by the Department will involve setting out how the Department is going to improve that process and improve the transparency around it. Tables will be produced, and one hopes that they will be useful to this Committee, in particular. So, I suggest that the council is having a real impact, particularly in contributing to the general understanding of public finances, which is a complex matter, and how they work. It is having an impact on improving public discourse. Yes, it is having a significant impact.

You also asked about the risks. Sir Robert Chote has said that the council is working very well without the legislation. He welcomes the fact that we are going to put it on a statutory footing. The absence of that statutory footing is not causing him any problems at the moment, but he is able to answer for himself. Obviously, however, we want to copper-fasten that independence and access to information through the legislation.

Miss Brogan: That is fair enough; thank you. You touched on this before, Tony, but will you elaborate on the steps that the Department took to push on with the Bill when the Executive were down.

Mr Simpson: Before the collapse of the Assembly, the previous Minister, Conor Murphy, agreed a policy paper. We were unable to bring that to the Executive because there was no Executive at that time. However, there were caretaker Ministers, so Minister Murphy circulated that to the two caretaker Ministers to take their views. Those views were fed back into the process to develop the paper that went to the current Finance Minister, Minister Archibald. With the agreement of OLC colleagues, they began the drafting process. Significant drafting had already been done on the stocks, on the basis of that previous policy paper. That provided a solid foundation for us to begin that work again, once we got the new policy paper agreed.

Miss Brogan: Finally, can the role of the council be expanded or changed by the Bill?

Mr Simpson: Yes. The functions are very broad. The Bill gives a lot of latitude to the council to determine its work programme. It is envisaged that the role of the council could evolve if, for example, the Executive decide to take on additional fiscal powers. It sets the basis for the council to look at what it does. We may need to return to expand its role through secondary legislation, if there is a very formal role for it relating to forecasting, tax revenues and so on. There is scope to expand its role.

Miss Brogan: Thank you for that.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): I will bring in Gerry, who is online. Gerry, can you hear us? We cannot hear you. We will bring Gerry in after a couple of further questions from me. I will return to some things that Paul Frew asked about while we resolve the issue. We will bring Gerry in as soon as we can.

On the question of access to papers, I understand that the British Government are trying to amend the Budget Responsibility and National Audit Act 2011, which created the OBR, to firm up the legal obligations on the Treasury to provide documents to the OBR in order to ensure that the OBR has the information that it needs to produce forecasts, for example. Some of us are still dealing with higher mortgage payments as a result of Liz Truss's Budget in October 2022. Part of that issue was that the information was not given to the OBR so it did not produce a forecast ahead of the Budget. Are you looking at that? You spoke about the need to move in parallel or lockstep and to at least reflect what the legislation on Budget responsibility does, so should the Bill create a legal compulsion for the Department to provide papers to the Fiscal Council?

Mr Simpson: It will do. It will require the Department to provide the information that the council needs to perform its functions. The role of the OBR is broader than that of our Fiscal Council, in that it produces forecasts of the impact of the UK Government's decisions on tax, spending and borrowing. The ongoing work in London is, as you say, to tighten up the requirements.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): As mentioned, the OBR legislation was the forerunner — the model.

On the broader work of the OBR, I have talked about economic forecasting. There is nothing to stop the Fiscal Council from doing economic forecasting but it is not mandated in law. It could even gather and publish an average or a summary of other external economic forecasts. It could build its own model and produce a forecast if it was resourced to do so. Is it looking at doing that as opposed to simply doing a spending analysis?

Mr Simpson: The key thing about forecasting relevant to the OBR is that it is not the OBR forecasting the economy. When we think of public spending, it is not about economic forecasts so much as the output from them. The key output is what the economic changes or decisions mean for tax revenues.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): The OBR produces an economic forecast though. It produces something that says, "The UK economy will grow by 2%".

Mr Simpson: Yes, it does, but from a financial viewpoint, the forecast is a component that feeds into questions on what the Treasury's resources will be. For example, how will economic growth feed into income tax, corporate tax and all the rest? There is nothing in the Bill on forecasting requirements, but the requirement to produce forecasts on tax revenues will depend on which tax powers, if any, the Executive ask for.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): I have often thought that one of the deficiencies that we have is that, in our policymaking discussions, key economic metrics that are specific and local to here are not joined up with policy interventions. I do not just mean GDP growth. It could be levels of unemployment or economic inactivity, which we talk about a lot here and is a real challenge. It could be one of a number of things. I wonder whether it would be useful for the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council to produce, or at least collate, an authoritative official set of economic indicators, rather than forecasts, and publish them alongside its analysis of our spending decisions so that the public and we, as legislators, can say, "Well, actually, the decisions we make here have an economic impact, and they have an impact on things like employment. How are Executive policies affecting that?".

Mr Simpson: It is something that we are thinking about. There is a step before that: what are the data requirements to do that sort of forecasting? We have had discussions with our colleagues in the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency. It would be a key piece of work, particularly in light of any decisions around tax devolution, but you are right: the council could do more general economic forecasting. What information and data would it need? What would our statistician colleagues need to produce to enable that proper forecasting? That is a piece of work that we will need to do, but it is not currently in the legislation.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): It would be genuinely useful, and I do not mean that in an oppositional way. If there were means by which — I think that we have Gerry Carroll back on now — the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council was able to produce an analysis of the broader economic impact making more money available for childcare or for — to grasp another nettle — investment in waste water infrastructure, which would unlock housebuilding and a whole range of other positive developments, that would, frankly, unlock a better policy discussion in this place. There would be official record of it. That was a statement rather than a question.

I will bring in Gerry Carroll.

Mr Carroll: Thanks, Chair. I could not unmute, but it seems to be OK now.

Thanks for the presentation. I have a quick comment and a question. Generally speaking, economics and finance can often be viewed in abstract terms, with, quite often, abstract debates, but there are real decisions that affect people's lives. Is it within the remit of the Bill to ensure that there is a trade union voice and a human rights body or individual represented on the Fiscal Council? Is that in the terms of reference? Could that be added now? Where does the power lie in that regard? I am not casting aspersions on anybody, but those voices are quite often left out of debates about finances and economics. Not only are the members of those organisations usually impacted negatively by economic decisions, but unions and other groups have a wealth of experience in terms of researchers and policy on economics and finance. Is such a provision being considered? If not, can it be part of the Bill, or would there have to be an amendment? What is the position on that?

Mr Simpson: The Bill as drafted sets out the functions of the organisation. It sets out that the membership of the council needs to have the required skills and expertise in public finance and so on to be able to undertake those duties. All members need to be independent of political influence. They also need to be competent, and to have a strong background in economics and public finance. That is the focus in the Bill at the moment when it comes to the current and future membership.

The Bill also sets out that there will be an independent public appointments process for members of the council, in line with Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments for Northern Ireland guidance and rules around all that. That will be the process for appointing members.

Mr Carroll: Thanks, Tony, for that. I do not have the full reference in front of me that you commented on, but that sounds as though that could apply to somebody in a union or a human rights organisation. Many have expert knowledge of public finances. That is useful.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Great. Given that no other member has indicated that they want to ask a question, I think that this is a watching brief for us. There is lots that we could continue to ask but we will have the opportunity to do so again. We will also have the opportunity to consider the Bill because we will be doing detailed scrutiny of it, and we will have the opportunity to consider amendments as a Committee and as individuals. This is an important part of our pre-legislative scrutiny. Members have given a broad view about some of the questions that are going to be asked. I hope that we see more detail on the Bill sooner rather than later. I appreciate the update and the candour on that.

Dr Aiken: Maybe the Committee would like to be informed about the progress. We have been told that it will be by the end of this calendar year. If there are going to be any delays — I am speaking as a Deputy Speaker — if you say that the delay is due to the weight of the legislative process, when there is no legislation coming through, it will probably raise a few flags.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): It is fair to say that the Assembly is not overburdened with Executive legislation. [Laughter.]

Dr Aiken: We are not overly burdened.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): It may well be that there is lots of legislation going on in the background but MLAs ain't seeing it. Certainly, those of us who are not in ministerial office ain't seeing it.

Mr Frew: That is a valid point, Chair. Where is the backlog? Is it in the DSO or the OLC? What does it matter to the Department of Finance if three Bills are coming from the Department of Education?

Mr Simpson: We are not dealing with any backlog at the moment. We are having to work through the detail of the Bill with colleagues in OLC, and we have a constructive working relationship with them. There is no backlog that is delaying us. As I said earlier, we are working to ensure that we get good legislation that has the precision that we need. Once the Bill is ready, we hope to introduce it as soon as possible.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): I want to be absolutely clear for those who were not in the room at the start: the Department says that it still hopes to introduce it, as per the legislative programme, in this calendar year but that that is not guaranteed. However, it is more confident that it will happen by the end of this financial year, which is the end of March.

There is a draft Bill. Is that with a Minister at the minute?

Mr Simpson: No.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): OK.

Mr Simpson: We are meeting OLC colleagues next week to discuss where we are with that.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Has OLC said that there are particular bits that it wants to go through and be absolutely certain about?

Mr Simpson: Yes.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): OK. In the spirit of being constructive, I appreciate your candour on that, but, obviously, we want to see it sooner rather than later, as does, I think, the Assembly in general, particularly given that we were promised lots of actions and a legislative programme, which was, in itself, relatively modest. We hope to see it sooner rather than later, and I am sure that we will drag you, and lots of other people, back and ask you more questions then. Tony, Wendy and Sarah, thank you very much.