Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I welcome Susan Anderson, Peter Rice, Alison Clydesdale and Cindy Noble from the Department for Infrastructure. I seek Committee agreement that the session is recorded by Hansard. Is the Committee agreed?

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I invite the officials to make an opening statement of up to 10 minutes. You can then expect some questions from Committee members. The floor is yours.

Ms Susan Anderson (Department for Infrastructure): Thank you, Chair. I shall start with some opening comments, and I will leave some time for questions. Members will have received the written briefing from the Department on December monitoring. This will be the last monitoring round in this financial year. In previous years, we had an October monitoring round, followed by a December/January monitoring round. However, the October one was pushed back, and the December/January one has been moved to this month.

Given the pressures that were experienced across all NI Departments, they were not allowed to submit resource bids in this monitoring round, and that, too, is different from previous monitoring rounds. On resource, we still face a number of inescapable pressures, in particular in our arm's-length bodies (ALBs), Translink and NI Water. We are continuing to engage with our non-departmental public bodies to make sure that they can take action to live within the budget allocations that they have received, and we will continue to assess that internally.

As I have mentioned, resource bids could not be submitted. However, the Executive gave a commitment to fund pay-related costs should additional funding become available. Therefore, following that Executive commitment, we submitted a bid of £6·7 million. We declared an easement on the resource side. However, that related to reprofiling the transformation funding for the transforming planning programme. That was ring-fenced, so we were unable to use it for anything else in the Department and therefore had to return it to the Executive for a decision on how it would be reprofiled and allocated.

Departments were able to submit capital bids. As you would expect, we bid quite strongly for capital projects and priorities for the remainder of this year. We submitted bids totalling £113·1 million, as set out in the briefing paper. As you will see from the table provided, the bids were prioritised. We started with overplanning.

Members will recall that, as part of the opening budget decision, we agreed to overplan by a certain amount to make sure that we got funding out at the start of the year. That was a proactive management decision. However, we still need to bid for that to manage it down in-year. That bid is £34·1 million. We then bid for £19 million for structural maintenance, which is the second-highest priority. That was based on an assessment of what could be spent between now and the remainder of the year.

You will see, as you work your way down the table, that we bid for street lighting, £10 million for NI Water's drinking water infrastructure, which reflects what NI Water has outlined it can spend the remainder of the year, and some smaller inescapable pressures. Moving on, there are high-priority bids in areas that are not contractually committed at this stage. They include Foyle port borrowing, the Enterprise fleet replacement, the Ballynahinch bypass and desirable Translink projects.

We also submitted a number of easements that relate primarily to ring-fenced areas. The Department was therefore unable to reuse or reallocate that money. You will see in the table that we submitted an easement of £102 million on the A5. The balance of that was for Shared Island funding, and £28 million was for Executive funding. We also submitted easements on the A6, Belfast Rapid Transit, the Lagan pedestrian and cycle bridge and some smaller easements on the Newry southern relief road, the Enniskillen southern bypass and the EU PEACE PLUS Enterprise fleet. As I said, that funding was ring-fenced, so we could not use it. However, we made the case to DOF that, given the scale of our bids and the amount that we could spend between now and year end, we were keen to get that reallocated back to us, but I stress that that is a decision for the Executive.

That was a run through where we are with December monitoring. I am happy to take questions, Chair.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): That is great. Thank you very much, Susan, and thank you for coming to the Committee. I may skip around a wee bit. I will start off, and then I will go to the Deputy Chair. On resource funding and the £6·7 million for pay pressures, where are those pay pressures?

Ms Anderson: We have pay pressures in a range of areas in the Department, in NI Water and Translink. We can manage those in the Department, however, and, equally, NI Water has demonstrated that it can manage its pay pressures. At this stage, the remaining pay pressures are in Translink.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Are you saying that that £6·7 million is going to Translink?

Ms Anderson: No. That depends on, first, whether we get the £6·7 million —

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I understand that.

Ms Anderson: — and then the Minister has to consider that in the round, confirming the position with Translink, depending on where Translink's pay negotiations are as well.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): OK. Let us not make that assumption. The bid is for £6·7 million, and assuming that you get that, what percentage is going to Translink?

Ms Anderson: Again, that is a decision for the Minister to take, based on the current assessment of pay pressures at that point.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): OK. Let me rephrase that and go in a slightly different direction. Is it your understanding that Northern Ireland Water submitted a £5 million resource bid to the Department?

Ms Anderson: NI Water has indicated a pressure of £5·3million. That will depend very much on assumptions and how those work out between now and the year-end.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): OK. Is any of that £5·3 million related to pay pressures?

Ms Anderson: My understanding is that NI Water has confirmed that it can live within its current budget allocations, including for pay. That figure, then, would be more for seasonal events, depending on rainfall etc, between now and the year-end.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): OK, that is great. I want to turn to capital and the word "overplanning". When I saw that word, I thought that it was just me being new to the Committee. I asked three special advisers and one director of finance in a different Department, none of whom had heard the term "overplanning" before. Is that a term that is just used in DFI?

Ms Anderson: I cannot speak for other Departments, but it is something that we do in DFI. We overplan because we have a large capital budget. Other Departments, perhaps, have smaller capital budgets, and therefore it is not as easy for them to manage capital overplanning. We do it in capital, but we do not do that in resource. That is because we know that projects will slip throughout the year. In previous years, we have got additional funding in-year, so we need to make sure that we have plans in place to spend that. If we have plans in place at the start of the year, that means that we are getting better value for money and that we can spend any capital in a more measured and appropriate way, rather than just trying to spend it at year-end. That is why we do that, but I cannot speak for other Departments. We have done it in DFI as a prudent financial management tool.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): It is more the term. Would it be fair to say that another word that a Department might use would be "contingency"?

Ms Anderson: No. It is not a contingency. A contingency is something that we would hold for an event that might happen that we do not know about. It is not a contingency. We have already committed that spend, and it is being developed as we speak. In my mind, those are two very different things.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Two different things. OK, that is fine. The figure of £34·1 million is 30% of your overall capital bid for overplanning. I note that in the incredibly small print in the brief, the justification for that is that it is 4% of your overall capital budget. Did I read that somewhere?

Ms Anderson: Yes. At the start of the year, when we are looking at the budget allocation that we have, we normally overplan by about 4% of our budget. Again, that is a figure that we have used in previous years, which has worked well for us. We have been able to manage that down, either through natural slippage or through additional funding coming in. That is a percentage that we have used in previous years, and we will do it for this year as well.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I want to ask you about how you have classified it as a priority. It is down as inescapable. You will correct me if I am wrong, but is that money that you might spend between now and the end of the financial year?

Ms Anderson: That is money that has already been committed. We have already factored that into our opening budget decisions. It has gone out to the Department's ALBs, so it is already committed. It is spend that is on the ground and has either been done or is in the process of being done.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Wow, OK. You are effectively saying there that you have a contractual commitment on that £34 million.

Ms Anderson: Yes, absolutely. It is already factored in.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): OK. What happens if you do not get that £34 million?

Ms Anderson: Again, if we do not get it, we will need to look at what other projects we can slow down across the whole range of projects in the Department and its ALBs. As I said, we would not do that until we hear the outcome of December monitoring.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): You mentioned slowing down projects. Correct me if I am wrong, but the £34 million is money that, effectively, you will owe to someone by year end. Is that right?

Ms Anderson: That is right. It is committed.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): So far so good. If you do not get that money, you will stop other capital projects so that you do not have to pay for them in order to pay this.

Ms Anderson: It may mean that, instead of progressing something in March, we might do it in April. Those are the kinds of decisions that we need to look at. We are not at that stage yet, because we are bidding for it, and you will note the amount of easements that we have given back to the centre. It is totally a decision for the Executive, but we are hopeful, given that it is our highest-priority bid and we are a big capital-spending Department.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): OK. That £34 million is a sizeable amount regardless. To stay with that concept, I want to understand what happens if you are not successful in getting it. You used the words "slow down". Would it mean that you would not proceed with some other capital projects to the point where they would be pushed into the next financial year? Again, correct me if I am wrong, but I imagine that you cannot just slow down a couple of things and say, "Oh, there is our £34 million". You cannot build half a road. It is such a large figure. I want to understand, if you do not get it, where the Department is considering making this saving, for want of another term, in order to meet the contractual obligations to which it has already signed up.

Ms Anderson: Again, we will look at that when we hear the outcome of December monitoring. At that stage, we will be able to pinpoint more clearly what we might need to do. We continue to monitor our capital outturn on a monthly basis. There is also likely to be natural slippage in some areas. A number of things are in the mix. There is that natural slippage and what outcome we get from December monitoring. Our last resort is to look at slowing things down, should we have to do so.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Susan, do you accept that natural slippage and so forth will in no way get anywhere near £34 million in three months?

Ms Anderson: I totally accept that it is a lot, but we need to look at what happens. There are staffing costs in there as well. A whole range of things are in the mix. It also depends on our ALBs. Peter wants to come in on that.

Mr Peter Rice (Department for Infrastructure): I will explain some of the context. Even just in Translink, between 215 and 300 separate projects are ongoing at any one time. When we talk about slowing projects down, it is not one, two or three projects but potentially a large number of projects. Therefore, it gives you scope, not by stopping them but by potentially slowing down those projects at that time of the year. That might give you a sense of the scale of how many projects are involved.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): OK. That is fine. I suspect that you will not answer this question, but, in your previous answers, you mentioned that there was a range of things that you could do to try to address the £34 million. Have you any sense of what those are? Can you give any specifics?

Ms Anderson: No, we do not have anything more specific at this stage. Again, we will look at that if we need to, depending on the outcome of December monitoring.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Fine. I will pause there. I have some other questions, but I do not want to take up all the time.

Mr Stewart: Thanks, folks, for coming along today and for your presentation. We make this point every time about monitoring rounds: the one consistent thing is, as you know, that we never get everything that we ask for. Some of the pressures, as you and the Chair discussed, are inescapable. I turn to the £19 million bid for structural maintenance. That is down as a scalable bid. Will you talk me through that bid and how you could make an inescapable pressure slightly more escapable, should you have a smaller budget? If we do not get the full £19 million, how are we planning to spend that money and make that work within the remaining year to ensure that we have road safety and that our roads are up to the standard that is needed?

Ms Anderson: I suppose that the reason that we submitted it as a scalable bid is to indicate that, if we were to get anything, we would be able to spend something, rather than bidding for £19 million or nothing. That is why we identified it as being scalable. It was to try to help to get something out of the monitoring round. I will hand over to Cindy.

Mrs Cindy Noble (Department for Infrastructure): Structural maintenance includes the resurfacing and reconstruction work that we do. We have contracts in place in all our areas for that type of work. We also have programmes of work in place for things that we would like to be able to do. Depending on the outcome of the December monitoring round, we will revisit those programmes and look at what optimum delivery would be. Obviously, there are certain types of schemes that you do not want to be doing in January, February and March. We will work closely with the contractors on their resources, and we are fortunate that we have an internal consultant who can deliver the design capacity for those types of schemes. It is about looking at the programmes and selecting the projects that you know that you can deliver within the available time with the resources that are available. We have any number of schemes that we could consider, depending on the outcome of the monitoring round.

Mr Stewart: That is useful information. What percentage, or amount, of the £19 million bid is for amounts that have already been committed to contracts and contractors for works that are planned? What percentage is for schemes that you would like to see undertaken on top of those?

Ms Anderson: None of the £19 million is committed yet. We cannot commit until we get the outcome of December monitoring.

Mr Stewart: OK. I maybe misheard that, because I thought that you said that you had already committed to some of the contractors for ongoing maintenance schemes.

Mrs Noble: We have existing contracts and contractual arrangements for that type of work, but we have not written any works orders associated with that money.

Mr Stewart: So, every contract that has been awarded is being carried out with the money in the in-year budget.

Mrs Noble: They are multi-year, multi-term contracts.

Mr Stewart: I appreciate that. Is any money for capital works sitting within any of the divisions, currently, for resurfacing schemes or road repairs that should have taken place but have not, in this financial year?

Mrs Noble: I can only speak for the southern division, where I am the divisional roads manager. We have some works outstanding within the current allocations. I know of at least one scheme in the Armagh area that we are still working on and hoping to deliver in the coming weeks. There are one or two. We are also committed to working with the Department for Communities on delivering some schemes associated with the Newtownards public realm. There are therefore one or two schemes sitting within our current allocations that we still have to deliver, but most of the capacity and work that we would normally do is completed.

Mr Stewart: That is good to know. Do you know, roughly, the value of outstanding works in the southern division?

Mrs Noble: It is probably in the region of £1 million. There or thereabouts. Obviously, there is also some capital structural maintenance that goes towards asphalt patching. We are conscious that we will be doing a bit of that type of work as well.

Mr Stewart: That will be spent within the current financial year.

Mrs Noble: Absolutely.

Mr Stewart: No problem. Thank you for that. I move now to arm's-length bodies and the fact that there is no resource funding. Susan, you talked about the work that has been ongoing to make efficiency savings. I would like to hear more about that. Do you have any concerns about potential overspend, again, given what we continue to hear from our arm's-length bodies about inescapable pressures? They keep telling us that they have done all that they can. They have put in another £5 million bid. Are you concerned about the potential for a repeat of the overspend?

Ms Anderson: I will hand over to Alison to talk about NI Water, and Peter will talk about Translink.

Ms Alison Clydesdale (Department for Infrastructure): Northern Ireland Water submitted its annual operating planning budget to us in February. At that time, it said that it had a resource requirement of £172 million, which was above the final out-turn of last year. The Department asked it to look at that again and to look at more savings. That was reduced to £161 million, initially, and it has come down to £156 million. It has been allocated £151 million. As part of the review of the operating planning budget, Northern Ireland Water has confirmed that it can live within the £151 million. The resource bid for £5 million in the December monitoring round is to address some of the risk assumption that we are making around the weather. Last springtime was quite dry, so the costs were not so high for the likes of pumping. We have applied that risk assumption, again, in relation to the weather, but should it be different and very wet, there might be a risk of increased funding. However, Northern Ireland Water has confirmed that it can live within the budget that has been provided.

Mr Stewart: That is good to know. The Chair touched on pay pressures, particularly around Translink. We know that there are ongoing negotiations between the unions and the Department, and there has been talk about potential industrial action. I am keen to get a flavour of where that is, and of the gap in funding that may exist and will need to be filled. I know that the Minister has to make a decision, but what is your assessment of where the gaps are, how close that might take us to industrial action and where you think that we need to get to in that funding piece?

Mr Rice: I will take that Deputy Chair. Officials work closely with Translink throughout the year on its financial allocation, and you referred to the pressures. We are working closely with Translink to understand those pressures and the actions that it is taking to live within the budget. Translink will live within its budget, and it is taking action with efficiency plans. Translink has also brought forward some other activities to reduce its resource pressures, and those are being considered by the Department.

As the arm's-length body, Translink is responsible for negotiating pay with its staff, and it has entered into negotiations with the relevant trade unions. I am aware that some of the trade unions have previously balloted their members in advance of those negotiations. The ballots have come back, and the union members have voted to take action up to and including industrial action. That is as far as it has gone. The negotiations are at the stage where Translink has made an offer to the unions about the pay, and it will be for Translink to confirm whether it is affordable from its budget allocation, both for this year and next year. The negotiations are ongoing, as far as I am aware, and the outcome of the December monitoring may help inform some of that, but the negotiations are now between Translink and the unions.

Mr Stewart: OK. It will be a relief for the many people who are concerned about potential industrial action before Christmas. Peter, that is effectively on ice and awaits the outcome of the monitoring round and the ongoing negotiations that could go on beyond Christmas.

Mr Rice: That is far as I want to comment on the matter.

Mr Stewart: If I may, I have two more questions, Chair. NI Water has inescapable pressures of £10 million for drinking water infrastructure, and there was a similar amount in the previous monitoring round. Obviously, when it comes to drinking water infrastructure, people may panic about the potential for supply disruption. Can you talk us through NI Water's explanation? How much can it, potentially, get by with if it does not get the full £10 million? Where might that fall short?

Ms Clydesdale: The £10 million capital bid from NI Water is based across six projects. Of the £10 million, approximately £8 million is for waste water projects to release capacity and relieve development constraints, and some £2 million is for water projects to replace the trunk mains.

Mr Stewart: OK. It is £8 million for waste water capacity, and £2 million for water. Will that percentage ratio be applied to any funding from the bid for £10 million?

Ms Clydesdale: If we do not get the full £10 million, we will look at which projects can be delivered to spend the money by the end of March. However, NI Water has told us that it can spend the full £10 million if it is available.

Mr Stewart: I have no doubt that NI Water could spend the full amount.

Ms Clydesdale: If it is not available, the spend will be scaled down accordingly.

Mr Stewart: My final question is on Translink and its Enterprise fleet replacement scheme. What is the assessment of the state of the fleet as it stands? What is the potential for the fleet to go off the rails should the scheme not go ahead? Will there be any ROI involvement in the funding for that capital project?

Mr Rice: The current fleet is coming to the end of its 30-year life in 2027. There are ongoing maintenance costs for the Enterprise, as with all train sets. As the train sets get older, they need additional maintenance to ensure they are up to standard, and, as the fleet gets older, you would expect the maintenance costs to increase. There is a joint project between DFI and the Department of Transport to replace the existing Enterprise fleet to enable the hourly service to continue. The project is ongoing, and we have just completed the procurement exercise. We hope to award a contract, subject to the completion of the appropriate business cases. The first new train sets are due to arrive in 2029 or 2030.

Mr Stewart: If the bid is not successful, will that affect the contract, or is the bid for another phase of the contract to upgrade another batch of Enterprise trains?

Mr Rice: No. The project is ongoing, and we have not yet awarded a contract.

Mr Stewart: OK.

Mr Rice: It is a large project, and there will be smaller contracts for consultants etc, but the procurement has been completed for the main train contract, and we will award the contract over the coming weeks and months.

If the bid was not successful, we could maybe look to see whether that contract could be awarded at the start of the new financial year rather than at the end of the current financial year.

Mr Stewart: OK. That is very useful. Thank you for your time.

Mr Harvey: Thank you all. Susan, you said that you are not able to submit resource bids apart from ones that are pay-related. How does that compare with what we were submitting at this time last year?

Ms Anderson: In previous years, we have been able to bid for resource at this stage, either in October monitoring or in December/January. The situation is quite different this year because of the pressures being experienced across other Departments. The issues in Health and Education have been in the media. On that basis, Departments have been told that they cannot submit resource bids. Furthermore, the Executive have already given a commitment to meet some pay pressures across Health, Education, Justice and our Department. Those Departments have the first call on any funding that is available. Therefore, it would be pointless to submit bids if there is no funding available. That was the rationale, as I understand it.

Mr Harvey: OK. Thank you. The Ballynahinch bypass is one of the priority projects. It has a start date, does it not? That is already submitted. Can you tell us more about that?

Mrs Noble: It continues to move through the procurement process. We can come back to you with the exact start date.

Mr Harvey: Please do. The last that I looked, there was to be an upgrade on the A1. I think that the Ballynahinch bypass is on the list after that.

Mrs Noble: Again, it is moving through the procurement process, yes.

Mr Harvey: Maybe you could update me on that.

Mrs Noble: Yes, certainly, we can.

Mr Harvey: Can you tell me any more about the Ards public realm scheme?

Mrs Noble: We are working in conjunction with DFC and have substantially completed the footway works. DFI's contractor is doing that with funding from DFC. Now that the footway works have been substantially completed, we are programming some resurfacing of the carriageway at Frances Street.

Mr Harvey: OK. When is that due to complete?

Mrs Noble: I think that we have three weekends booked in January or February to do it.

Mr Harvey: Thank you very much.

Mr McMurray: You have referenced a few times the fact that there is one monitoring round as opposed to the two that there were previously. I can remember when PMQs happened twice a week; now it is only once a week. What challenges does having only one monitoring round place on the Department? Are you expecting that to be ongoing? Will this be the new norm? Obviously, it will fluctuate. What are the wider challenges of having one monitoring round?

Ms Anderson: It presents us with more of a challenge because we have more assumptions factored in. The later it is in the year, the more certainty we have. Alison mentioned NI Water and the weather assumptions. We would have more certainty about that in a later monitoring round than we do now. It builds more uncertainty into our profiling and what we know about at this stage in financial terms. That is our key challenge when it comes to the timing. I have no indication that this will become the new norm. Traditionally, there are three monitoring rounds each year, and I expect that it will go back to that next year. However, again, it is ultimately a decision for DOF and the Executive.

Mr McMurray: OK. You touched on this in the answer, and it leads into my next two questions as well. We are seeing more and more extreme weather events and their impact on our infrastructure. In south Down, various roads have closed. When it comes to road maintenance — we have touched on it — and having only one monitoring round, what contingency plans are there should extreme weather events affect the road infrastructure and other infrastructure that is critical to Northern Ireland?

Mrs Noble: You referred to recent incidents in the south Down area. As you know, we diverted and utilised resources to do temporary repairs in the likes of Sunningdale Drive and Tullybrannigan Road, and that came from existing resources. We have made an additional bid — you will see it in the package — for storm damage. We are looking for additional funds to cover that. Presently, we have taken it from the existing allocation in the southern division.

Mr McMurray: With extreme events such as that, you have to take funding from other places.

Mrs Noble: Yes.

Mr McMurray: Do other people just lose out?

Mrs Noble: Yes. Essentially, we will have to delay work that we may have prioritised in some of our other programmes.

Mr McMurray: Likewise, outside Killowen, there was a road that was affected. That is a habitual thing now, is it not?

Mrs Noble: There are a number of locations where we are in the process of getting repairs done. We will have to find the resources — contractor resource, internal resource and financial resource — to complete those repairs. Those will have to be prioritised, and other schemes that we would have liked to do may not be completed within the same timeline.

Mr McMurray: The Committee had a session with NI Water last week and heard about pressures, if that makes sense. This week, we get you guys, and it is like, "No, it's OK. They can live within each other's budgets". I always struggle to get my head around it. Given the increasing demands on fresh water and the fact that there is only one monitoring round, NI Water is running to stand still. How far backwards is it going to go? What is the Department's view on letting NI Water go backwards on waste water and fresh water? That is a huge concern.

Ms Clydesdale: NI Water advised us, as part of its operating plan and budget, that it requires £405 million of capital this year. That is what it thought that it could spend this year. Following June monitoring and as we sit currently, it has been allocated 90% of that capital requirement, and there is a bid in for a further £10 million.

Mr McMurray: Yet the living with water programme is stalled in Belfast and Foyle. OK; no worries, Chair. Thank you.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): That was nearly another question, Andrew.

Mr McMurray: It was, I know, but I try to keep to three. I try to be kosher about it.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): No, that is fine.

Mr McHugh: Tá fáilte romhaibh uilig.

You said that procurement is part of the problem when it comes to the reduced requirements. Will you expand on that?

Ms Anderson: The reduced requirements on capital were largely in ring-fenced areas, so there will be delays to procurement and to determining whether or not we can proceed with certain capital schemes, given the ongoing legal case on the A5.

Mr McHugh: What is the difficulty with procurement? Does that difficulty come from within the Department?

Ms Anderson: I have no more information on the difficulties with procurement. It is more a question of whether we can proceed, given the stage of the legal process that the A5 appeal is at, at this time.

Mr McHugh: Has it impacted on projects other than the A5?

Ms Anderson: It is mainly on the roads projects. We are holding some of those to see how we can progress and what we can do, legally, within the outcome of the A5 judgement and the ongoing appeal.

Mr McHugh: Do you have any idea of what percentage has been impacted on as a result?

Ms Anderson: I do not know that figure off the top of my head, but I can certainly come back to you on that. We can pull something together.

Mr McHugh: And on the number of firms, essentially, that are involved?

Ms Anderson: Yes.

Mr McHugh: Go raibh maith agat.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Thank you. I have not seen anyone else indicating. Justin just indicated, but I will go first.

I will take you to the "Overplanning" bid on the bid form that you submit to DOF, which I am sure that you will have in front of you. There are three rows in the "UOB" column: "A0102", "A0602" and "A0302". There is no more detail than that. The figures for capital, which are in the right-hand column, are £8 million, £13 million and £12 million. They add up to £34 million, which I am guessing is the total. What do those numbers mean? What do they relate to? It seems that your £34 million has been split into three.

Ms Anderson: We are required to do that for DOF reporting purposes. It is very technical. UOB stands for "unit of business". That is the way that we are required to report to DOF, and the way that it will then report to Treasury. I do not know, off the top of my head, which UOBs the descriptor numbers that you cited refer to, but I can come back to you on that. The numbers in the "Record" column relate to specific projects within each relevant unit of business. Although we do not allocate our over-planning to specific projects, we still have to recognise that it is there whenever we report to DOF. We have done that on a pro rata basis. That does not mean that those figures link directly to project x, y or z; it is a pro rata allocation for the purposes of reporting to DOF.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I might be really stupid, but I did not understand any of that, Susan. [Laughter.]

I might have to have another go at that.

Mr Boylan: It was very well explained, Susan. [Laughter.]

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Watch yourself at the end there, Cathal. [Laughter.]

Mr Boylan: We are listening attentively down here, Chair.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I appreciate that.

Forget the UOBs: I get that. There are three figures there that, when added together, total £34 million, which, I assume, is your —

Ms Anderson: Over-planning amount.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): — in-year over-planning bid. Right, OK. I suppose that my question is this: what do those three figures represent and where do they come from?

Ms Anderson: That is just a pro rata allocation of the over-planning, because we have to show it somewhere. We have simply made a pro rata allocation. It does not mean that it relates to a specific project x, y or z. We have simply made a pro rata allocation because we need to report it to DOF.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Right. Essentially, you could make up anything. Can you make up any figures in any UOBs?

Ms Anderson: We have not made it up per se; we have made a pro rata allocation based on where our budget sits. The UOB level is usually Roads, Rivers, Translink and NI Water. We have just made a very high-level allocation. For example, 30% of our budget is against A0102. It is not, but that is just an example. We have done 30% of the over-planning against that. I could get a little bit scientific about it, but it does not, in any way, represent projects x, y and z.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): That answers my question. The figures, in themselves, are relatively meaningless, really.

Ms Anderson: It is the total that we are focused on.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): It is the total. It is the £34 million.

Ms Anderson: We are required to report it in a certain way to DOF, and that is the best that we can do.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): That is fine.

Mr McNulty: Thanks, folks. You mentioned the Newry southern relief road. What is the easement on that? Explain why there is a £1·9 million easement on the A5, I believe.

Ms Anderson: The £1·9 million easement is on the A6. That is simply due to delays to the major road schemes as a result of the A5 ruling. Due to that ruling, we are unable to progress some of those other road schemes until we work through the implications of that and the appeal as well.

Mr McNulty: That money has gone back.

Ms Anderson: That money has gone back to DOF because it is ring-fenced and we cannot spend it.

Mr McNulty: OK. I might come back to that.

A number of weeks ago, the Mineral Products Association presented to the Committee. It presented a stark position and a warning about the state of our roads, highlighting that we are at a critical point for the road network. The association pointed out that the budget for essential road maintenance has fallen to its lowest level in decades, covering only a fraction of what is needed to maintain the network in a safe and serviceable condition. The situation has reached breaking point due to years of underinvestment and loss of experienced staff, leading to deteriorating road surfaces and growing safety risks. The Mineral Products Association, which is, of course, the industry body, is calling for urgent action to restore adequate funding and rebuild delivery capacity in the Department for Infrastructure in order to ensure the safety of road users and the efficiency of the transport system. Today, we had a big announcement about a new "camera car" to take pictures of potholes. How will December monitoring address the concerns of industry? To what extent will the monitoring round and the bids by your Department address those concerns?

Ms Anderson: We recognise that. We have submitted bids of £19 million for structural maintenance. We have submitted that strong bid. You will see there that it is our second-highest priority bid behind over-planning. It is second because over-planning is already committed. It is already out there. Structural maintenance is effectively the top priority behind the over-planning amount in recognition of the importance of securing that additional funding.

Mr McNulty: When it comes to staffing levels, there was a redundancy factor with regard to projects that were under way. Have you been able to ramp them back up again? How has that affected the Department's ability to address the major structural concerns about the road network?

Mrs Noble: As I said, depending on the outcome of the monitoring round, we will have to work very closely with the industry and our internal teams to maximise the delivery that we can do. We are aware that certain areas may have been more affected by some of that, so we are looking at a balanced approach and sharing whatever the outcome of that is across a number of our contracting resources. It will not all go to one project. We have long-term contracts for the likes of resurfacing and reconstruction, and we would develop those programmes so that we can optimise the delivery. Certainly, you are right: we will have to consider the redundancies and the lack of skilled workers and ensure that we have a balanced approach to that.

Mr McNulty: Is that a question of just turning the tap back on?

Mrs Noble: It is not a question of just turning the tap on. It is complicated by the fact that it is coming at this time of the year. The type of schemes that you can deliver at this time of year are very different. For example, this time last year in the southern division, we spent £600,000 over six months. If we are to be successful with the bid, we need to look at specific projects in which we maximise what we can deliver over a shorter period of time. It is about selecting projects that will give you that sort of efficiency in delivery, such as dual carriageways or the longer term strategic-type roads. It is about looking at developing projects that are much less time-dependent and are not dependent on a lot of preparatory works, such as kerbing or drainage works. As I said, we have to be very selective in the type of projects that we deliver so that we can maximise.

Mr McNulty: You mentioned longer-term, more strategic projects. What about the more run-of-the mill projects, such as the structural maintenance of our everyday roads, potholes, and resurfacing strips? Is the Department able to get to grips with those?

Mrs Noble: The structural maintenance allocation goes towards resurfacing and reconstruction. We also have the resource allocation, which goes towards patching, which, essentially, is repair. We have our routine patching work that we do. When we develop our resurfacing programmes, one of the factors that we look at to determine the condition of the road is the number of structural defects, including potholes, that it has. That feeds into the design solutions that we come up with for resurfacing. There is a linkage; you cannot just say, "Well, you just repair the potholes. You don't do the resurfacing". By doing the resurfacing, you are, effectively, increasing the structural integrity of the road and getting rid of the potholes.

Mr McNulty: Is the industry content that the monitoring round will deliver?

Mrs Noble: The figure of £15 million is what the industry indicated that it would need to be able to continue delivering.

Mr McNulty: What is the road in Armagh that is being resurfaced?

Mrs Noble: There is a section out of Armagh towards the Moy. There are two sections there that we would like to do.

Mr McNulty: Excellent.

Mr Boylan: I know that very well. I will bring Justin down.

Mr McNulty: It is orchard country. I was down there a few weeks ago, picking apples. You should try it some time, Cathal.

Peter, you have a great engineering name; Peter Rice from Dundalk was a great engineer who was very famous globally.

You said that 2027 is the end of the Enterprise fleet's life cycle and that the new fleet would, hopefully, be able to maintain the hourly Enterprise service. If the new fleet is not delivered, what are the implications for the hourly Enterprise service?

Mr Rice: As I mentioned, the two Departments have entered into a procurement exercise for the Enterprise fleet replacement. The timeline is that those trains will come in from 2029 onwards. The Enterprise service was delivered by Enterprise trains originally, but, since we moved to an hourly service last year, it is also delivered by a mixture of Translink trains and Irish Rail trains.

The existing Enterprise trains have a design standard life of 30 years, which brings us up to 2027. That does not mean that, at the end of 2027, they all stop working and there is a cessation of service; it just means that, as we go forward, the fleet will get older, and, a bit like with your car, you will have to invest more to maintain it and keep it going. You can keep it going beyond 2027; there is no indication that the service will stop, but, obviously, as the trains get older, higher maintenance costs will be involved.

Mr McNulty: My final question is about delays in procurement on the A5. What were the failings in procurement?

Ms Anderson: I am not sure that there were failings in procurement; it is just that we are not able to proceed, given that the A5 ruling was made, which we are currently appealing. That is the issue, rather than failings.

Mr McNulty: The A5 judgement, which is ongoing through the courts, is delaying procurement. Obviously, that is in relation to the A5, but there is a knock-on impact for every other major roads project. Which major roads projects are now not able to proceed because of the A5 delay?

Ms Anderson: I will need to come back with the details.

Mr McNulty: Will you give us a detailed list of the major roads projects, which we are all keen to see delivered, that cannot proceed because of the A5 judgement, and the likely timelines for them coming to completion?

Ms Anderson: Yes. Again, it will depend on the outcome.

Mr McNulty: OK. That is all from me. Thank you.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Before I bring Cathal in, I will pick up on a point that you made, Peter, on ageing train stock. I will link it to something else in the evidence. Last week, we had the Community Transport Association (CTA) here, I think — did we? — or did we have you guys?

Mr Rice: Yes.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): You were here? [Laughter.]

It is all getting a bit blurry for me.

Mr Rice: We liked it so much that we thought that we would come back.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Well, it is such a friendly Committee. Departmental officials are always welcome.

A point was made about ageing stock. CTA moves people around in buses; it may move people around in a range of ways, but it certainly moves them in buses. I have had correspondence from CTA saying that the fleet is getting old. It is a bit like your comment about having an ageing train fleet. ALBs obviously fit into the bid process for monitoring rounds, but is there any capacity for DFI, when it puts bids together, to include bids from non-ALBs? Is there a route map for other people to write in? Take CTA and its minibuses: can CTA write in and say, "Like our trains, our buses are ageing. We need nothing in the region of £113 million, but, if you are bidding for capital, we might take £75,000 and replace a few buses"? Does or can that happen?

Mr Rice: At the minute, no. Susan will correct me if I am wrong. On occasion, there has been a specific pilot project whereby the Department has sought bids from community transport for new vehicles.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I do not necessarily mean community transport. I used that as an example.

Mr Rice: I am familiar with that one, Chair. The way that the Department allocates grants to community transport is by community transport bidding for a grant. It is resource; that mechanism does not allow for capital bids. We mentioned that in the evidence that we gave to the Committee last week. As part of the review of community transport, one of the issues that the community transport sector raised was that its fleet is ageing and about how it can secure capital funding for that. The issue has been identified; I am not sure what the solution is. We are considering that as part of the process that we are going through. As far as I am aware, however, at this time, we would not accept a bid from community transport for capital funding. We would accept one for resource but not capital.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Susan, could the Department accept a bid for capital funding along the lines that Peter suggested?

Ms Anderson: The Minister can consider any bids that are put to her, but the grant process is that there is a certain amount of money, and we go out and look for calls for grant funding within that amount. That is how that approach works.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I will stay with the CTA example that Peter used. CTA can apply only for resource. It has ageing stock that, like our trains, is getting really old. This sort of thing comes along, and there is a massive capital bid from the Department. Given the pure size of the figures, is there a mechanism by which organisations such as that, which work alongside DFI but are not ALBs, can write in to you folks and say, "Here is a specific issue that we have. Can you do anything about it?"?

Ms Anderson: We need to have a grant scheme, which would need to be open and fair across the piece. In that situation, if we were minded to do that, there would have to be an open call for bids.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): An open call. Got it.

Ms Anderson: It would have to work as a grant scheme.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): That is absolutely fine. That is brilliant, Susan, thank you.

Mr Boylan: Thanks very much for the presentation. Cindy, do not go too far down the Moy Road. We do not want you going out of the constituency.

Mrs Noble: It is not far [Inaudible.]

Mr Boylan: We are firefighting each time, this year as in any other year. It is slightly different when it comes to monitoring rounds: there were three monitoring rounds, but this year is different. We see loads of work being done between January and the end of the financial year; we see most of it on the roads. The challenge that you have this time around is that you have contractual arrangements for six- or seven-week programmes, but it is now questionable as to whether you can do them.

Mrs Noble: Yes, certainly. We will have to be selective on the type of projects that we choose, because we do not have the time to do the likes of the more urban schemes. I am thinking about Downpatrick, where, last year, we did a lot of work and ended up re-ducting a lot of Downpatrick. We spent six months working nights in Downpatrick. We just do not have that time, so we will have to look at projects that minimise the preparatory work. There will always be kerbing and drainage work — improving the drainage and making sure that the kerbing infrastructure is adequate — and then delivering the carriageway resurfacing and reconstruction work.

It will probably be more heavily focused on the carriageway-type work. That can lend itself to the likes of the Moy Road, which is part of the trunk road network. We can also do a lot of the more rural distributor-type roads. In the southern division, I am thinking about the likes of Moneyslane and Castlewellan. There are number of routes that we can do, but we have to be conscious of the weather as well. We may, in theory, have 12 weeks. You have to allow within that for times when it would not be appropriate to do the type of work that we would be delivering. That has to be factored in as well. We have to be very selective in the types of projects.

We also have to look at not just the southern division but right across the divisions to see where the teams are and where the resources lie. Depending on the outcome, we would have to speak candidly with our contractors to see what commitments they have and what they can do. Carriageway-type delivery is specialist. Our contracting industry is efficient and can deliver. We can spend £600,000 over two weekends if that is what you want to do.

Mr Boylan: We have this conversation all the time about roads.

There has been a lot of talk about over-planning, which [Inaudible.]

It has not been mentioned yet, but the multi-year Budget is a big issue. What are your views on that? I am not saying that it would overshadow the over-planning issue. Every time that we get money, we are firefighting where to spend it, especially on shovel-ready projects.

Ms Anderson: We have been prepping information in relation to a multi-year Budget, working towards four years for capital. That would help to give some certainty, particularly for structural maintenance, in making sure that that is managed appropriately across a four-year period rather than looking at just a year-to-year budget position. It would help contractors as well. It would help everyone for planning.

Mr Boylan: It would give them some security about work.

Ms Anderson: Yes.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): There are no further questions, so it remains for me to thank you very much for coming along and giving your evidence. We might follow up with additional questions or information that we require. Apart from that, safe journey home.