Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): I apologise to our guests for the delay: we had quite a bit of business to get through. We have with us, from the Executive Office, Moira Doherty, the new permanent secretary; Mr Gareth Johnston, deputy secretary in the good relations and inclusion unit; and Ms Brenda Henderson, deputy secretary in the Executive services and international relations unit. You are all very welcome to the Committee. In the papers, we got just your business plan for last year. Was there anything else to be received from you? No. Would you like to make some opening remarks, please? Thank you.

Ms Moira Doherty (The Executive Office): Thank you, Chair. We really appreciate the opportunity to meet the Committee today.

I joined the Executive Office in February. Prior to that, I was deputy secretary in the Department for the Economy with responsibility for skills, further and higher education and careers. Prior to that, I was deputy secretary in the Department for Communities. I had earlier director roles across Justice and Infrastructure including strategy and innovation; the joint Justice and Health domestic and sexual violence and abuse strategy; and public transport policy and delivery. That experience has given me a really strong interest in cross-departmental collaboration, public service innovation and social impact. I am keen to bring that experience to bear on the work of the Executive Office. I acknowledge the contribution made by David Malcolm as interim permanent secretary, particularly in steering the Department through the publication of the Programme for Government and the launch of a number of critical strategies, including the ending violence against women and girls (EVAWG) strategy.

Since joining the Department, my immediate priorities have been early engagement with the Ministers, colleagues and partners; addressing the pressures associated with the departmental budget; grounding the work of the delivery unit so that it provides effective support to the Ministers on delivery and transformation; and maintaining momentum against the Ministers' priorities, as set out in our business plan. With your permission, I will make some brief remarks about the budget, the delivery unit and delivery of the Department's business.

As Committee members will be aware, the Department has entered the new financial year without an agreed budget. A multi-year settlement would provide greater stability and support longer-term planning. That remains an important objective. TEO's delivery ambitions are set out in our bids for a multi-year settlement, on which the Committee has already received a briefing. In the meantime, my focus is on managing the resources carefully and maintaining delivery against the Ministers' agreed priorities, while being realistic about the wider funding envelope. While not yet an agreed outcome, the Finance Minister's proposals around earmarked resource allocations, including for EVAWG, the language bodies, the Climate Commissioner and victims funding, are welcome. Looking ahead, the Department and its arm's-length bodies will continue to secure best value. The Ministers have been clear that administration costs must be really tightly controlled, with resources directed towards delivery. That expectation is fully reflected in how I am leading the Department

The delivery unit has been a key priority for me since taking up post, because it is one of the principal mechanisms through which the Ministers' priorities are followed and delivery is supported in practice. The Committee recently heard from the head of that unit on the approach, so I will not repeat that. Instead, I will set out how I see the unit supporting the Ministers as it continues to mature. The delivery unit exists to help the Executive and the wider NICS to turn the Ministers' priority reforms into delivery on the ground. It does not deliver services, and it does not replace departmental accountability. Its role is to support and challenge Departments to provide insight and access to expertise and to help maintain focus on a small number of agreed priorities.
In line with ministerial ambition, my focus is on ensuring that the unit supports transformation in a systemic and sustainable way, moving beyond individual projects to a portfolio approach. That includes supporting shared learning across Departments; strengthening genuinely cross-cutting capability, particularly in digital, data and innovation; and helping approaches that the Ministers want to see succeed to scale more effectively. In short, the delivery unit's purpose is to support the Ministers in seeing their priorities delivered more consistently and at pace while keeping responsibility and accountability firmly with Departments and services.

The Department's 2026-27 business plan will, of course, be shaped by the eventual Budget position and shared with the Committee following ministerial consideration. In the meantime, we continue to deliver across the breadth of our responsibilities, including the recent launch of the EVAWG delivery plan and the forthcoming Head, Shoulders, Knees and Toes campaign.

I particularly thank the Committee for the constructive and supportive way in which it has approached the truth recovery legislation. The engagement has been most welcome. Everyone recognises what a complex and sensitive area that is. It will remain a key focus for the Department, and I know that it will continue to be a priority for the Committee for the remainder of the mandate and beyond. The Committee Stage has reinforced the importance of the Committee's role in scrutinising legislation, in challenging the Department where appropriate and in supporting the work that it develops. That constructive approach will remain important as the Assembly works through the remaining stages of the legislation before the summer.

Rather than take up any more time with introductory remarks, I am happy now to take questions and comments from Committee members.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Thank you very much again, Moira, for coming before the Committee today. The briefing papers refer to you as a principal adviser to FM/DFM:

by

strategic frameworks. In the business plan for last year, under the "Our Strategic Context" heading, you refer to the balance between technology, climate, green growth etc. The business plan states that, in quarter 3, you will take forward the appointment process for the Climate Commissioner. We passed the regulations by a clear majority in the Assembly 13 months ago. What is happening with that post? I am concerned that we will not see an appointment within this mandate and that statutory responsibility for the commissioner to oversee the Climate Change Act (Northern Ireland) 2022 will not be fulfilled.

Ms Doherty: Those discussions and considerations are ongoing. We are mindful of the commitments in the business plan.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Was the recruitment process taken forward in quarter 3 of last year?

Ms Doherty: No, that was not the case.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): OK. That has not happened. Has anything happened in relation to that office? Has preparatory work been done, for example, to find a location and draw up operational plans and job descriptions?

Ms Doherty: As I said, the consideration of those aspects is still live. There is nothing that I can share with the Committee at the moment.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): As a Committee, we scrutinise those regulations. There is a mismatch between what your Department has asked us to do and what we are fulfilling.

I will move on. The business plan document refers to:

T:BUC — strategy. It states that, in quarter 4 of 2025-26, there will be the launch of a public consultation on:

We are now well into quarter 1 of 2026-27. Where is the consultation on the refreshed T:BUC?

Ms Doherty: The consideration of T:BUC is live. The Ministers have been clear about the importance of integrating all the approaches to make sure that everything that we have in T:BUC and good relations is integrated and takes account of the live context that we are in. The Ministers are engaging with officials on T:BUC, and proposals will be brought forward when that engagement has concluded.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Respectfully, we have been hearing that same language since this Committee was set up over two years ago. Less than a year remains of this mandate, and it is so disappointing. We have seen a breakdown in race relations in some areas, but we have also heard about the good work being done by Communities in Transition. There is clearly a need to knit all of it together, but we are not seeing any product from that conversation. Is there any indication of when the strategic framework will be launched, so that the public can have sight of it and Committee members can scrutinise it?

Ms Doherty: You make a really good point, Chair, that those aspects are really important. We have had a decade of significant success with T:BUC in particular. It is one of the Executive Office's flagship programmes. While I appreciate that there is great strength of feeling there, the Ministers are minded that all of the lessons across the range of related and integrated strategies will be brought together. Twelve weeks in, I am not in a position to give you a firm date. However, I can give you a really firm assurance that the Ministers are particularly engaged on that and very strongly acknowledge the importance of bringing all of those things together.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): My frustration is that there are ongoing crises. We have had riots on the street and a breakdown of public order. There is disorder in our communities. There will never be a perfect time for the Ministers to say, "Right, we now have a framework. Let us move forward with it". We keep saying, "We must take this latest incident into consideration". We are never going to move forward on it.

I could spend the whole hour asking questions myself, but I have to be respectful of my colleagues. The document contains a section with the heading "Engaging Internationally", which outlines the Europe strategy and the international relations strategy. It says that, in quarter 1 of 2025-26, the plan is to:

It goes on to talk about establishing partnership boards, drafting plans etc. Where are we with the Europe strategy and the international relations strategy?

Ms Doherty: The international relations strategy is under live consideration by the Ministers. To go back to your earlier point, Chair: work is ongoing, on the ground and in the Department, across the full range of areas that you mentioned under T:BUC and under the international relations strategy. We have a very active international relations team both here and under the auspices of our three bureaux. I want to reassure the Committee that, while the strategy is a very important milestone, of course, that does not preclude the very active work that is going on across the board.

Mr Gareth Johnston (The Executive Office): It may be worth noting that, this year, we are celebrating 10 years of T:BUC camps, with 36,000 young people having come through those camps. Last year, we delivered 97 projects through the district councils good relations programme and 62 projects through the central good relations fund, with 69,000 people taking part —.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): I am not disputing that. We could throw in the investment strategy, because we have been waiting for that. My problem is that we are a scrutiny Committee that is meant to hold you to account: that is how our tripartite system of government works in Northern Ireland. If we do not have those strategies, how do we hold you to account? You are in receipt of public money. You have a large staff team — it is perhaps not as large as you would like — with responsibilities. If we do not have all of that stuff in front of us, how can we ensure accountability and oversight of those functions?

Ms Doherty: The Committee has played and continues to play a very active role. You have a closed session coming up later this afternoon with a team from the Department, and I know how important your scrutiny has been to their work. I fully understand the role of Committees, having worked within the system for many years. The distinct nature of the work of the Executive Office, which I am fairly new to, including the fact that it is a joint office, brings a different dynamic. It is very important to say that, as the Committee will know, many of the issues that sit with the Executive Office are, rightly, some of the most complex and sensitive issues in the Executive. Where you are dealing with a joint office, there are issues around alignment, which require additional time. While I hear your frustration, Chair, that is a feature of the system within which we operate.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): I started by commenting that you are a principal adviser. I am very conscious that you have to deal with some very thorny, knotty issues. Some of those issues maybe should not sit with TEO and would probably sit more comfortably with other Departments. I am very conscious that we are looking at a business plan that was produced a year ago and that so many of the milestones — I genuinely do not want to go through them line by line, but I could — have not been delivered or are well out of date. Where do we go from here? For example, you have come to Committee today, and you have not given us any papers apart from a year-old business plan. How do we hold you, as senior civil servants, to account, if we see in front of us examples of key targets being missed?

Ms Doherty: I think that there has been a mismatch in our expectations, in that, for me, 12 weeks into the role, this was to be an introductory briefing to set out the position and my intentions. If your intention was for me to bring something before the Committee at this stage and I have misunderstood the introductory element of the briefing, I apologise.

The Committee has a really important scrutiny role to fulfil, and it does so in relation to all our business week after week. I absolutely take your point around progress on the business plan and on how you wish us to report to you on that. As you know, we have a really significant programme of achievements and delivery. I am basking in reflected glory, because those were all delivered by my predecessor and my colleagues, but there has been a number of achievements, particularly in recent weeks. For example, there was the recent launch of the EVAWG delivery plan and the memorial event here in February, which was a tremendous milestone. I can point to a lot of really positive delivery from the Department, and I know that you will hold me to account for that delivery.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): OK. I want to ask for a very quick update on letters of offer. You said that there is no agreed budget. I met some groups last week, and they are very concerned that they are working at risk, having not received a letter of comfort. We are now well into the new financial year. That related to the minority ethnic development fund, but I am not sure about other programmes. When will people get their refreshed contracts for funding?

Ms Doherty: I had a meeting with our finance director this morning. We are urgently putting together proposals on how we will operate within the contingency envelope that we have been provided. You know that we are constrained —

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): I know.

Ms Doherty: — by virtue of the fact that we do not have an agreed Budget. We now need to formulate options for the Ministers that set out what is possible within the parameters of that contingency envelope. We need to do all that we can to make sure that, as you say, we fund those groups on the ground in a way that is safe, lawful and maintains integrity under 'Managing Public Money Northern Ireland'. That piece of work will be undertaken urgently over the next few days.

Mr Dickson: Thank you for coming to us. I appreciate the fact that you personally are only 12 weeks into the role, but the Department is many more weeks into its role and responsibilities. I equally appreciate the fact that the Executive Office has a very broad range of responsibilities. In light of the political reality of that office, it cannot be easy for you to seek consensus between two Ministers who are quite often at polar ends of the spectrum when it comes to their views on various policies and how those might be delivered. However, you have the Programme for Government and plans that are already set out. What is the problem with delivering them? How often do you sit down and speak with the two Ministers? How often do you converse with them and say, "Here is what I want to achieve", whether it is "today", "this week", "this month", "this quarter" or "this mandate". You, as a public service, have a responsibility to deliver the programmes that have been agreed, but even they are not being delivered. How often do you sit down with the two Ministers and say, "Here's what we need to be doing"?

Ms Doherty: I have a detailed session with the Ministers at least once a month. In the past month, I have had two, or perhaps three, detailed sessions. I am trying to be very careful in my response, because I consider it a privilege to serve in the Northern Ireland Civil Service (NICS) and in the Executive Office. That is the nature of our constitutional arrangements. The Executive Office is a joint office. My job is to work within those structures and give the best possible advice that I can. I agree that we have priorities that are set out. Those indicate the strategy and the direction of travel. It is our job to provide coherent, well-evidenced advice that supports the Ministers in making decisions.

Mr Dickson: When you have done that, where is the roadblock? Why does it not happen?

Ms Doherty: We can point to many instances of progress and delivery in the Executive Office and beyond. The issues that we just discussed are under live consideration, many of them for very good reason. I would not categorise that as a delivery issue.

Mr Johnston: We could look at what the office has done on strategies since the renewal of devolution. The early agreement on, and the delivery of, a Programme for Government has been key. We have seen the Executive agree the strategic framework for ending violence against women and girls. There is also the strategic framework on race relations, which is out for consultation. In addition, the Executive agreed a refugee integration strategy and a 10-year victims strategy. All of those things are very much within the responsibility of the Executive Office.

Mr Dickson: Where is the action on those? That is the hot air and the talk; where is the action?

Mr Johnston: I am on record as quipping that we used to launch ships and now we launch strategies, and as saying that it is important that those strategies are translated into action plans. All of them are being translated into action plans. In the past week or two, we have launched the EVAWG delivery plan for 2026-28. We were able to note at that launch what had already been achieved and the difference that was already being made. That issue requires generational change, but an important start has been made. The framework for race relations is out for consultation. A very detailed delivery plan sits alongside that. We really want to move away from the sorts of strategies in which everybody puts in what they are already doing, because you sometimes then spend more time monitoring them than you do with flexible frameworks, where there are action plans that are very much focused on what we, as a Department, can do in our convening and coordinating role to make a difference across government.

Mr Dickson: Speed is not exactly something for which one would naturally give the Executive Office an accolade, even when it comes to simple things such as answering Members' questions for written answer. I regularly send questions, and I regularly see Members asking, "When is my question going to be answered?". It is a fairly basic element of government that Ministers are held to account on a whole raft of things, not least by individual Members who have a particular interest in a statistic, a piece of information, a programme or whatever it happens to be. I know that civil servants write the answers and give them to the First Minister and deputy First Minister, who have to sign off on them. Why are they not being signed off on in a timely manner, in accordance with the time frame that is set down? There is a question for you.

Ms Doherty: We —.

Mr Dickson: And what are you going to do to improve that?

Ms Doherty: As I said, a unique construct in our constitution is that two Ministers head up the office, so there are times when alignment requires a little more time.

Mr Dickson: Is that an excuse or a reason?

Ms Doherty: I would characterise it as a fact.

Mr Dickson: In reality, we have always had two Ministers in that role. You would think that, after 25 years, we would have worked out a bit of business efficiency. Sadly, that seems to be lacking in the Executive Office. Are you going to change that?

Ms Doherty: If we are talking about the efficiency of our processes and structures, it absolutely is my role to ensure that the supporting processes that enable Ministers to do their proper role are as tight and agile as they can be. We, as a senior team, have been discussing that, and we will certainly endeavour to make sure that our Ministers get the best advice and support and that our enabling processes are of as high a quality as they can be.

Mr Dickson: Will you have that conversation with the First Minister and the deputy First Minister? Will you say, "We're up to the game; we're a lean, mean machine that can deliver for you. How are you going to deliver for us?"?

Ms Doherty: It is my job to support the Ministers.

Mr Dickson: It is also your job to advise the Ministers. A good piece of advice would be, "Get the finger out, and get some of this done".

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): I will move on.

Mr Brett: First, Moira, congratulations on your appointment. The Department for the Economy's loss is TEO's gain. I thank your colleagues at the table and you colleague at the back of the room, who kept claiming that she was going to retire [Laughter.]

It is great to see her — a dedicated public servant — here.

My paper states that the session is an introductory briefing, Moira, so you did not pick up anything wrongly. I am keen to know what your vision is for the Executive Office when it comes to the complement of staff under your direction. Is the Department too big or too small? Is it over-resourced in some places and under-resourced in others? What have you found in the 12 weeks that you have been in post?

Ms Doherty: It is interesting that, on the face of it, the Department is about the same size as the group that I had at Economy. We have about 440 folk in post, and, as the Committee will be aware — this is what I am learning as I get up to speed in the role — quite a number of those are senior posts, which often draws comment. I am interested in understanding what that looks like when we extract the elements that are unique to our Department; for example, we have the chief of staff of the head of the Civil Service, and we have two grade 5 principal private secretaries.

My understanding, which I need to test and interrogate, is that our proportion of senior staff would be on a par that in the Cabinet Office. However, we are very mindful of the pressure on public finances, and, as a senior team, we have had a discussion about making sure that we can carry out our role as efficiently and in as streamlined a way as possible.

It has been pointed out to me, as I have asked those questions, that the Department has grown in line with additional functions that came to TEO. We need to take all that into account and to make sure that we have people at the right level doing the right things in the right places. It will be part of my role, as accounting officer and in leading the Department, to work with my team to make sure that the Department is staffed appropriately and that we continue to look at the most streamlined and efficient way of doing things.

One thing that I am focused on — it may be a hangover from my previous job — is upskilling and reskilling our staff. We have brilliant people, some of whom will speak to you later today, and I want to make sure that we have a good grasp of what skills we need and that we, as senior colleagues, invest our time in bringing people on.

We have to be mindful of grade drift, which is a phrase that we hear quite a lot. We are focused on that and are therefore focused on making sure that people are carrying out tasks that are appropriate to their grade and that they are given a good job to do. People will do a good job if they have a good job.

Mr Brett: Yesterday, I had the pleasure — Gareth may say displeasure — of going to Gareth's office in Castle Buildings. There was number of empty offices, with the exception of those occupied by Gareth and his team, and that struck me. What is your Department's approach to staff working in the office versus staff working from home?

Ms Doherty: Our approach follows the policy of 40% of time spent in the office, and I am a big advocate of people spending that time purposefully. I work part of my time in Stormont Castle and part in Castle Buildings, because it is important for me to get to know people and to be visible. I have tried to tag that on to times when I know that teams will be present, as they have different anchor days.

Mr Brett: My issue with TEO is its unique nature: officials may need to engage with the office of the First Minister or the office of the deputy First Minister and there may be a need to bring people, such as special advisers, together for discussions. Can that be as nimbly and easily done when the First Minister and the deputy First Minister are so often based here while officials are sitting at home?

Ms Doherty: At the risk of repeating myself, our job is to serve the Ministers, so we ought to be wherever the Ministers need us to be and be able to accommodate what the Ministers need. Even if someone had a day when they were due to be working from home but a Minister needed to see them here, they would be here. That is my expectation.

Mr Johnston: It is important to make the point that the hybrid working policy is predicated on business need.

Mr Brett: OK. As accounting officer, you have probably had a chance to look at some of the proposed Committee amendments to the Inquiry (Mother and Baby Institutions, Magdalene Laundries and Workhouses) and Redress Scheme Bill. The First Minister and the deputy First Minister recently sent a letter to the Committee outlining their concerns about the decisions by members of the Committee on amendments in their name and the possible implications of those amendments not just on your Department's budget but on the Northern Ireland block grant as a whole. What is your view, as accounting officer, of some of the amendments proposed by some members of the Committee?

Ms Doherty: I am aware of the Committee's preference that the posthumous date goes back to 1922. The figures are modelled, so they are not precise, but my understanding is that that would result in an additional £27 million. This is an incredibly sensitive and complex area. That would not be affordable within our current budget envelope or within even the potential budget envelope, so the additional money would need to come from the Executive.

Mr Brett: Therefore, your position, as accounting officer, is that the amendments proposed by the majority of the Committee are not affordable.

Ms Doherty: That would not be my position. My position, as —.

Mr Brett: What would your position be?

Ms Doherty: My position would be that, if that were the case —.

Mr Brett: That is the case. The case is that the majority of Committee members have proposed amendments that will be considered by the Northern Ireland Assembly at Consideration Stage in two weeks' time. You are the accounting officer for the Executive Office, so your opinion on this matters. Is it affordable within the draft Budget proposed by the Finance Minister?

Ms Doherty: As Committee members know, the Budget is in draft form and has not been agreed. At the point that the draft Budget was published, in terms of the chronology and the appropriateness of the various processes, that has not been factored in, because it is a proposal; it is not yet law. If it were made into law, the additional money would need to be found. At this point, there is not the necessary headroom in the Executive Office Budget.

Mr Brett: Therefore, your position is that they are unaffordable.

Ms Doherty: My position is that,

were that to become law —.

Mr Dickson: That is true of all legislation.

Ms Doherty: — we would need to seek the — [Inaudible.]

Mr Dickson: No.

Ms Doherty: — funding from the Executive.

Mr Brett: Sorry, I could not hear you. Colleagues were talking. Apologies.

Ms Doherty: Any additional requirement that is not currently provided for in our baseline would need to be sought.

Mr Brett: Yes. Finally, Brenda, you look after international relations.

Ms Brenda Henderson (The Executive Office): I do.

Mr Brett: OK. First, it is important to recognise that the Committee values the work of all our bureaux, but, in particular, the bureau in the United States has undergone a lot of change recently and, I think, has improved massively in recent times, both in supporting operational delivery and recent visits by Ministers to the United States, including Minister Archibald, who is just returning from Washington. What value do officials place on our Washington bureau?

Ms Henderson: It is fundamental to how we engage with the wider world. Our overseas offices are about supporting the delivery of the Programme for Government and the economic vision for Northern Ireland. They are also about enhancing the persona of Northern Ireland as somewhere that people want to visit, invest, work and study and about building strategic partnerships. It is about making sure that we can

people to help us to sort issues that we want to sort but also to grow our economy and do all those sorts of things.

Mr Brett: Are there any forthcoming vacancies in those bureaux?

Ms Henderson: There will be. There is always churn. Obviously, I do not discuss individual HR issues, but there will always be churn. However, we are always aware of that and will plan accordingly.

Mr Brett: Do you plan to advertise any of the substantive posts of any of those

?

Ms Henderson: As they come up, yes.

Mr Brett: Will that happen in the next month?

Ms Henderson: Yes. We have vacancies coming up, because there are fixed terms in the overseas offices. It is a very tough job; it is not nine-to-five. You work in the evenings and at weekends. We like to have turnover in that and give other people the fantastic opportunity that you get from working in those offices. There will be vacancies coming up, and we will advertise for those externally.

Mr Brett: Externally?

Ms Henderson: Yes, externally. Absolutely.

Mr Brett: Outside the Civil Service?

Ms Henderson: Yes.

Mr Brett: Therefore, in the first instance, the recruitment will be external and not internal?

Ms Henderson: Yes.

Mr Gaston: Welcome to the Executive Office Committee. Hopefully, in your first 12 weeks, you have enjoyed the role and have settled in.

Some of the areas that I want to focus on were probably in your first-day brief. Page 6 of the business plan caught my eye. It states:

You touched on the staffing level in TEO. Am I right in saying that permanent secretary is a grade 2A?

Ms Doherty: Grade 2, yes.

Mr Gaston: How many grade 2As currently operate in TEO?

Ms Doherty: I am the permanent secretary.

Mr Gaston: So there are no other members of staff at that grade?

Ms Doherty: Actually, sorry; I just caught myself there. The Chief Scientific and Technology Adviser (CSTA) to the Ministers is also on that level.

Mr Gaston: Does Mark Browne work in TEO?

Ms Doherty: No.

Mr Gaston: Are you aware of Mark Browne?

Ms Doherty: I am struggling to see —.

Mr Gaston: The relevance? The relevance is that, last Saturday, Sam McBride had an article in the 'Belfast Telegraph' in which he talked about an unnamed civil servant on a 2A band who is in receipt of approximately £135,000 to £145,000. General practice is that somebody on that level of income would be named and that that would be publicly available information. However, Sam McBride is alleging that there is a member of staff in the Civil Service about whom the Departments are refusing to release information, even though that person is at the same pay band as a permanent secretary and the details of all the rest of the permanent secretaries have been released. Are you saying that that person is not based in TEO?

Ms Doherty: We need to be very mindful. I am aware of the FOI request. I am also aware that an internal review has commenced on that, and I do not think that it would be appropriate for me to make any further comment on it.

Mr Gaston: Is that person based in TEO?

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Timothy, I think that we need to move on. The witness has asked —.

Mr Gaston: We are talking about the staffing levels in TEO. There is a £10 million unmet bid for what TEO wants to achieve. What I am trying to establish is whether, basically, we have two permanent secretaries in TEO with only one performing the role? I think that it is relevant —.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): OK. So, I think that I picked up —.

Mr Gaston: I think that it is relevant —.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Excuse me, sorry. I think that I picked up from Moira that an FOI request is in on that. You will get your answer or hear where that FOI came in from in due course.

Ms Doherty: Gareth just reminded me that our first legislative counsel is also at permanent secretary level and is attached to TEO.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): OK, that is now in Hansard. Please move on.

Mr Gaston: Only three people are at that grade in TEO?

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Timothy, I have asked you to move on. If you do not, I will go to the next member. Thank you.

Mr Gaston: Page 5 lists your arm's-length bodies, among which is the Maze/Long Kesh Development Corporation. The Balmoral show will be at the Maze next week. The Maze is something that the Committee has been focusing on. I imagine that on day 1 you got a brief on where things stand in the Executive Office. At Question Time on 27 April, when responding to Michelle Guy, the First Minister said:

It is almost as if there is, for the first time in a long time, an agreed position on what is happening with the Maze. That was the first response to the question, meaning that it was an agreed position between the First Minister and the deputy First Minister. For anybody on the Committee who has been on a visit to the site, the potential economic benefits are clear from its closeness to Belfast and its size. The historic significance of the site in a World War II context is undisputed. What I am interested in, though, is the historic and reconciliation potential of the site. What is the agreed position on that in the Executive Office?

Ms Doherty: That is not an area that I have been engaged on yet. I am conscious that, as you say, the Ministers have been on record regarding the potential of the site. However, I have not had a detailed briefing on that. I am happy to write to the Committee if you would like more information.

Mr Gaston: Absolutely, because it is important to establish that. My understanding is that Sinn Féin is blocking the development of the site because it cannot get its peace and reconciliation building. Anything on that site in that form with the agreement of Sinn Féin will turn into a shrine, and that is something that I am very concerned about. If there is movement and an agreed position between the First Minister and the deputy First Minister, I certainly would like to know what that is to ensure that compromises have not been made regarding what goes on the site.

Earlier we talked about the £10 million of unmet bids. We touched briefly on the climate commissioner. There has been no recruitment for that post, and nobody will be recruited to that post in this mandate. Is that a saving of £2 million because the post has not been filled? It is the post and the entire office, is that correct?

Ms Doherty: I am not sure that we can say that that is a saving of £2 million. When you look at the bids for things that we were planning and which the Department had in line, it would not be as straightforward an equation as £2 million in savings. I am mindful that there is a relatively small budget in TEO that is not earmarked. It is about £85 million, and one thing that we have had to do consistently is be agile in making sure that that budget, which is fairly modest in the context of other Departments, is utilised to the absolute maximum by using flexibilities, so it would not be fair to say that there is a £2 million saving.

Mr Gaston: Would the Department have somewhere in the region of £85 million of headroom every year?

Ms Doherty: Our non-earmarked budget is in and around £85 million. However, the majority of the Department's funding, especially for particularly complex or sensitive issues, such as all our victims' funding, is in the earmarked pool. Therefore, it would not be accurate to describe the £85 million as "headroom": that is the budget for essentially everything that the Department does that is not in the earmarked category.

Mr Gaston: My understanding is that, last year, some £22 million was not used within that budget. Can you remind me how much it will cost if the posthumous date is removed from the legislation?

Ms Doherty: The modelled cost of taking the posthumous date back to 1922 — again, I have to be very clear that this is not the precise figure: it was modelled at a point in time — is £27 million.

Mr Gaston: There was £22 million last year. There is a pot of £85 million, and I understand that it is juggled between a number of priorities. The Committee supports the removal of the posthumous date, and if that were passed by the Assembly, the cost could, essentially, be juggled and come from that £85 million pot.

Mr Johnston: We need to be cautious because the figure of £22 million is not freed-up money. Yes: substantial easements were handed back, partly because the Executive were able to benefit from them. They were handed back last year from the earmarked money, particularly for victims' payments. However, that was due to timing differences between the estimates of when money would be spent and the actuality. As we know, it has been a very complex scheme. It has been difficult to predict with accuracy when the expenditure will come. The ultimate assessment of how much the scheme will cost has not changed, so the money was freed up just because of timing differences rather than because it was not still needed.

Mr Gaston: Yes, but, essentially, the same could happen in other years. Therefore, to say that it could not be found within existing budgets is, I think, stretching it when it has been shown that that money has been found in other years with easements.

As permanent secretary, can you tell me when Communities in Transition will become transitioned?

Ms Doherty: If you do not mind, I would like to make a further point on your previous remarks, just to be absolutely clear. I do not agree with the assessment that, because there was an easement in a previous year's budget, that means that that is essentially headroom that could be used in future years. If our finance director were here, he would be very clear that that was partially due to improved forecasting and modelling. At a point in time, there were more variables, but that situation and the speed of the process has improved, so the likelihood of there being a significant difference between what is profiled, what is bid for and what is delivered, and there being a gap of that kind, has reduced. It is really important that I am clear on that.

Mr Gaston: The money for the posthumous date would be spent over a period of years. I am using last year only as an example of there being movement — that fluctuation — in the Department's finances and projections. It is not as though what the Department is bringing forward as the cost —. It has been shown, as a result of being able to hand back and free up money, that that movement can happen. Therefore, the Department cannot say that there is no potential to build that in.

Ms Doherty: I do not share that assessment. I see it quite differently.

Mr Gaston: I move on to Communities in Transition. When does a community in transition become transitioned?

Ms Doherty: I know that there are people around this table who have worked for very many years in that space. The purpose of that important programme is to work on the complex, far-reaching and deep-seated issues in our society and to promote the conditions whereby we can have a positive and long-lasting peace. That programme, which is operating across the eight areas that have been identified as being the most vulnerable to paramilitary influence, is one that has had significant successes. I think that Ministers would very much support the work that they have done.

Mr Gaston: Are you not concerned that, since 2019, £26 million has been spent on the same eight areas? At what point do you turn around and say, "We explored this before moving to phase 3"? The move to phase 3 can only happen when more money becomes available. It is not a case of, "There is an area that has received money for seven years. Let us move on to somewhere else".

Mr Johnston: The programme has operated in the same eight areas, but not for the same things. As time has moved on, we have identified what is making the biggest difference in those areas. We have also identified a number of emerging issues, such as child criminal exploitation, child sexual exploitation and drug-related intimidation. We have moved from a broader approach to something that is very targeted in those areas. As we know, at the end of this financial year, that part of the programme comes to an end. The Treasury has held out the possibility of accepting bids for further work on the basis that they would address emerging needs, and colleagues from the Executive programme on paramilitarism and organised crime are working on proposals in that regard. Certainly, we are making the case that there are other areas that would benefit from that funding. As I am on record as saying at Committee, there has not been the necessary level of funding — bearing in mind our commitments to those existing communities — to move beyond. The vision is very much that we want to move beyond [Inaudible.]

Mr Gaston: You are starting to target and look at things like the problems that are caused by drugs. I look at my town of Ballymena and the number of deaths and suicides that have happened in and around it because of drug-related offences and the grip that drugs have on young people. Communities in Transition is looking at dealing with drug issues, so why are we not considering areas like that? Are you trying to say that Communities in Transition is moving away from dealing with paramilitary coercive control and the grip that paramilitaries have on the community to dealing with a drug pandemic?

Mr Johnston: No. It is still dealing with the influence that paramilitaries —

Mr Gaston: The two are linked.

Mr Johnston: — have and strengthening communities to resist paramilitary control, but some of the areas in which we do that are evolving. Drug-related intimidation is one, and the exploitation of children and young people is another. Colleagues are looking at what a future programme could look like, and I hope that that could mean moving into new areas, taking account of some of the concerns that you have just raised.

Mr Gaston: Moving away from the areas that have received all the money to date?

Mr Johnston: Well, at least embracing new areas, whether that means moving away or not.

Mr Gaston: Just as a snapshot —.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Very quickly.

Mr Gaston: Your business plans says:

What is the agreed Executive position on resetting the relationship with the EU?

Ms Doherty: There are mechanisms there to deal with issues. As they come up, those issues are taken issue by issue.

Mr Gaston: Is there agreement that the Executive want to have closer ties, or is there opposition to that in the Executive Office because one party wants to stick to its solemn pledge and resist the Irish Sea border? Have you heard that argument, or are the Executive pushing for a closer alignment with the EU?

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): I think that you have responded, have you not? OK. We move on to Áine, please.

Ms Murphy: Thank you, Chair. Moira and team, thank you very much for coming in. On the Chair's question on the business plan, I want to focus on the civil contingencies unit. Moira, will you give us a flavour of, or an update on, what has been happening there? I do not know what is to be delivered by quarter 4. We had a briefing some months ago from officials who were implementing modules 7 and 8 or modules 8 and 9 of the COVID inquiry findings. Can you give us a sense of where all of that is at?

Ms Doherty: The issues in the Middle East have meant that the civil contingencies team has been very active, and a lot of planning has been going on. It is working closely with colleagues in other jurisdictions, including in the Cabinet Office and the Office of Emergency Planning in the South. The team has been working with not only colleagues in those jurisdictions but emergency planning partners here, including in local government and other Departments. As you will know, the civil contingencies model is headed by a lead Department. It is not always the case that TEO is leading; it is supporting and enabling. I have heard really positive feedback recently from emergency partners in Wales and Dublin about the very active and collegiate role that our team has played. It was great to hear that positive feedback. The Committee received a briefing on the COVID work, which is ongoing. We await the completion of the inquiry.

Ms Murphy: I want to ask about the other Departments in the Executive that engage with TEO across civil contingencies. I am thinking about the recent cost-of-living crisis and the shortages of fertilisers and agricultural meal, as well as energy issues. How often is that engagement happening, for example, east-west and North/South between emergency leads, as you call them?

Ms Doherty: There is a formal rhythm of engagement, and that happens regularly. There is also informal contact, and not only at a civil contingencies and emergency management level. Alongside that, the head of the Civil Service has been engaging with the permanent secretaries' group. Obviously, civil contingencies is its own particular discipline and has its own particular rhythm and way of working. The head of the Civil Service has also been engaging with the permanent secretaries on the long-term potential policy levers so that there is some preparedness, taking account of those wider issues and, particularly, as you say, where they engage on cost-of-living and other public service matters.

Ms Murphy: OK, thank you. You have been in post for 12 weeks or thereabouts, Moira.

Ms Doherty: There or thereabouts, yes.

Ms Murphy: You detailed your Department's three priorities in your opening remarks. What are your observations, having come in over the past 12 weeks? You can be as open and honest as you want. [Laughter.]

Can you give us a sense of the opportunities that you see to strengthen the Department? There are, no doubt, challenges there as well.

Ms Doherty: There are challenges everywhere and in every job. As I said at the outset, I have dedicated my life to public service, and I consider it to be real privilege. The Executive Office is unique; people always say that, but then it is a unique privilege to serve there. I have been made to feel very welcome by the team. I have had a great deal of support. The First Minister, the deputy First Minister and the junior Ministers have been very welcoming to me and have been very clear that they want me to focus on delivery. They want the Department that supports them to be as agile and responsive as possible. To that end, we want to work in a really constructive way and make sure that we serve the Ministers to the very best of our ability.

I would also say that we wish to develop even further the collaboration and connection with other Departments, particularly through the work of the delivery unit. Civil contingencies is a great example of where that works well. There are a lot of opportunities for us to have increased collaboration between Departments and for TEO to play a role in supporting the whole system to work together.

Ms Murphy: You have answered my next question, given that TEO plays a central role in cross-departmental collaboration and has kind of been the anchor in facilitating all that. You mentioned civil contingencies and the delivery unit as well.

To go back to the delivery unit question, the sponsoring Departments and Ministers are ultimately responsible for delivery. Will you give us an update on the health transformation topics or issues in the delivery unit?

Ms Doherty: I am pleased to hear you describe TEO as an anchor. Hopefully, that is how our colleagues in the other Departments see us. Certainly, that is what we aim to be.

The delivery unit has six projects that are live. One is multidisciplinary teams (MDTs). Hopefully, many Committee members will be aware of that work. The latest figure that I got is that 900,000 people have engaged with the additional services in GP surgeries, namely physio, social work, mental health and district nurses. We have a lot of confidence that that is going to be a game-changer because it operates at community level. It is primary care and early intervention, and we look forward to seeing the results of that.

You are right to say that individual Departments are responsible. It would be fair to say that that is a new and unique way of working for us, and it is going to take time for that to mature and for us to get the best way of working. The transformation board includes external experts, and the level of support and challenge that the board can offer has been really valuable. I would like to see the projects work like an ecosystem. Our role, at the centre, will be to see where the lessons learned can be shared, not only between those projects but more widely, and can be mainstreamed so that we amplify the impact of that important investment.

Ms Murphy: Thank you.

Ms McLaughlin: You are very welcome, Moira. I hope that this is the first of many engagements with Committee as we see progress. Yours is an important role. Unfortunately, the Executive Office does not have a good reputation for delivery. I would not call it agile or responsive at all, so you have an uphill struggle to achieve your vision.

My questions are also around delivery because that is fundamental. There is a real problem with getting projects started and completed and getting outcomes. What role do you play in the six projects in the delivery unit? Are you hands-on, and are the First Minister and deputy First Minister, for example, hands-on in selecting projects and overseeing them? What kind of leadership is provided to the delivery unit? I was struck by how small it was when they talked to the Committee about it. Will you give me some context?

Ms Doherty: Yes, it is small. Small but mighty is how I would describe it. Ministers have attached significant importance to that work. They see its potential, particularly for growing a culture of innovation throughout the system. That is, perhaps, why the head of the delivery unit, at director level, reports directly to me, and that is unique.

I have a very hands-on approach to it. I have a personal interest in innovation and change. That is something that I have worked on for a lot of my career, so I am very energised by that area of work. There are no Ministers on the transformation board, but the delivery unit makes regular updates to Ministers, and Ministers have impressed upon me the importance that they place on delivery.

The thing that I would be really clear about, having worked on this sort of thing across a range of Departments, is that we have to be upfront about saying that innovation is about learning, trying something new, trialling things and piloting things. Although I am delighted to see positive feedback from the MDTs, for example, about which we already know, some of the other projects may need to course correct or, indeed, may not work out as envisaged. That is part of an innovation culture as well and will form part of the learning. That is one of the key things on which Ministers have been clear that they want to see a real drive. That is partly why I have been so personally involved. I am not a member of the board, as such — the board has a number of independent members — but I attend the meetings and am involved on a weekly basis —.

Ms McLaughlin: Do you attend all the meetings, Moira?

Ms Doherty: Since I have taken up this role, yes, I am an invitee to those meetings, and I engage with the unit, certainly on a weekly basis.

Ms McLaughlin: MDTs have been in place in Northern Ireland for many years. Pilots were rolled out years ago, so they are not really that innovative, but it is about rolling it out and expanding it. How do Departments sit down and identify projects with other Ministers, or is it just TEO? I want to explore what it is that you actually do to choose those projects when leading the delivery unit.

Ms Doherty: I will declare that I was responsible for bringing forward a project when I was in my old job. I am not sure whether I have to declare that as an interest. The process is that Departments are given the parameters within which to bring forward projects. Those parameters may be that the project should be about improving outcomes, having more sustainable services or making further efficiencies. There is a range of indicators around which projects are to be crafted. When I was working as part of that team in my previous role, there was a particular emphasis on things that cross boundaries. That is a particular role that the delivery unit can play: facilitating and supporting projects that cross boundaries in particular.

This Committee and many other Committees have, on multiple occasions, raised the importance of seeing things from the citizen's point of view rather than from a departmental or organisational point of view. The transformation board makes assessments and recommendations, and then those recommendations are considered, so we have —.

Ms McLaughlin: Are economic and social impact assessments made to see what kind of impact those recommendations will have on transformation in our society? Is there prioritisation of the things that will make the biggest difference, such as by taking people out of child poverty or delivering economic benefits? How exactly are they prioritised? Do they align with the Programme for Government? Is the strategic investment plan layered on top of that? If the delivery unit does not bring all that together, it, too, will become part of the problem of silo working.

Ms Doherty: You were right to point out that it is very small. That is deliberate: it is a small, focused and targeted team.

It is not only about supporting and, at times, challenging projects on delivery mode but, importantly, about picking up on the issues, blockages or gaps that need to be escalated in order to make sure that the joining up happens, rather than silo working.

Silo working as one of the potential characteristics of our system has been raised many times by Committees, including the Public Accounts Committee (PAC). That is why Ministers are placing such an emphasis on that and why, in particular, I have been asked to focus on it and to have the unit working directly to me. I was involved, not just in my previous job but in others, in a project that came forward from the Department for Communities. Lots of active and committed officials and Ministers are seeking to address the very issues that you raise around how we join up, work together, collaborate and use the fund to innovate in order to deliver better outcomes for the people whom we serve.

Ms McLaughlin: I turn to my final question. Moira, the Ebrington business area is part of TEO's role and responsibilities. According to the business plan, there is to be an agreement of a transition plan concerning the delivery of Ebrington to Derry City and Strabane District Council. Are you aware of where we are at with that work? There has to be some kind of plan regarding transport and vehicles on that site. I literally had to run to lift a child the other day as a car approached. It is extremely dangerous.

Ms Doherty: That is the plan for the Ebrington piece. It will be transitioned to the council. We agree that a transport management plan is key. We know the site intimately. As you know, in a previous role, I was in that area very frequently. Those things are all live and active. While it is fair to say that work on the plan to transition it to the council is live, that does not mean that, in its absence, our work is not continuing. Certainly, colleagues in Gareth's group are very active on the development of the site and the continued work plan. Traffic management and a transport plan are key.

Ms McLaughlin: Traffic management is key. I place it on the record: it is an accident waiting to happen. Children are on bicycles, small trikes and so on, and people are driving on the footpaths. There will be an accident. Everybody has been well warned.

Mr Johnston: That traffic management plan is at the final stages. We intend to agree it very soon and to implement it. Please be assured that it is getting the attention that it rightly needs.

The end goal is the handover to the council, but, in the meantime, we have taken a phased approach. The council has had responsibility for site maintenance. We formally signed a service level agreement (SLA) with it in March. Events and marketing and car park management will move over to it as well. A phased approach is being rolled out.

Ms Ní Chuilín: My questions relate to the funding that has been used in the Department for private consultancy, including the Strategic Investment Board (SIB). I am keen to get to the bottom of that. For example, the ending violence against women and girls strategy was initiated by some SIB staff. We had above-average payments going to staff in the Civil Service. I ask because I wonder how the Department will build up a pool of expertise if we keep going to the private sector.

Ms Doherty: As you know, SIB is an arm's-length body of the Department. It is not the same as private-sector consultancy. Our approach is that consultancy of any kind should be for bespoke specialist work where those skills cannot be readily accessed. I accept that, at times, that has meant that the readily accessed part has been the issue in that there have been issues around supply. At times, we have had to turn to consultancy due to issues around supply. Part of what we need to do, as I alluded to earlier, is make sure that we are building up the skill set and experience of the people in the Department, because we have really brilliant people.

The other thing that has really struck me is that, even though it is a very small Department, it has an incredibly diverse set of responsibilities and functions. That can mean that you do not always have a large pool of people to draw on with the particular skill sets that you need. As a leadership team, we need to work on that to make sure that people are getting the opportunity to build those skills up. At times, SIB colleagues provide really essential support, particularly, for example, around capital. In many jobs that I have had, I have had bespoke support from SIB on those capital builds in particular. However, I totally take your point that consultancy should not be for roles that you would otherwise assume should be generalist Civil Service roles.

Ms Ní Chuilín: I accept that, Moira, because the capital expertise of SIB is clearly understood. I am struggling with the fact that we had to use SIB when it comes to ending violence against women and girls. I appreciate that that was done when the Assembly was suspended. I am not saying that there was any difficulty with the staff working on that project. I just feel that staff at certain grades may not have opportunities for progression. For example, even when it comes to the business of TEO now, if there was a need for new projects, how would you find the skills and expertise if staff do not have a progression route? The other thing is that consultancy is far more expensive than using the Civil Service. At times, there is almost a tendency to go to consultants because we do not know what skills people in the team have. That is the reason for my asking that question.

Ms Doherty: Can I come back on that?

Ms Ní Chuilín: Yes, sure.

Ms Doherty: Just this morning, I had an email exchange with some colleagues about what is essentially a skills audit. We have a lot of work in train on a people plan. As I said earlier, it is a really small Department, but we have brilliant people right across the board. I agree wholeheartedly with you on asking how we give people those really stretching opportunities for development and how we make sure that we are giving people access to roles. Someone has come to the Department on secondment, and I have offered that she can shadow me for a while, because all those things help to enrich people's experience. These are really important jobs, and we want people to have a great experience.

Mr Johnston: On ending violence against women and girls, the Department had to start that strategy from a standing start and without having staffing resources at a time when it was quite difficult to secure staff, thus the reaching out to SIB. It is important to acknowledge that SIB colleagues were centrally involved in the Head, Shoulders, Knees and Toes coercive control campaign and the other campaigns. However, as of 1 April, the EVAWG team no longer has embedded support from the SIB, and we are in the process of filling those posts with civil servants.

Ms Ní Chuilín: That came at a significant cost, Gareth.

Mr Johnston: I understand that.

Ms Ní Chuilín: Was the cost of SIB staff not over £1 million?

Mr Johnston: I do not have the figures in front of me, but I take the point about costs; it is well made.

Ms Ní Chuilín: What you said about the skills audit is interesting, because that gives people progression and a career route. However, it is also about the relationship with the community and voluntary sector, which has the skills. What happens is that we go to a consultancy firm that then goes to the community and voluntary sector. It is not an equal relationship. I would like there to be an equal relationship with the sector, which does not mean just the big voluntary organisations. Most of the work that is done, even in TEO, on good relations and race relations comes from grassroots groups, but the relationship is not equal, and it is hard to stand over the financial cost of it.

Moira, it was remiss of me not to have welcomed you to TEO — I am sorry about that — having worked with you at DFC. You will do well.

We will have a briefing later about the truth recovery Bill and all the legislation that will underlie that. A senior member of staff who is looking at clerical sexual abuse is also working on another project. I have no issue with the member of staff, but that struck me as concerning, given the potential volume of legislation that we will be dealing with and all the other work that they are involved in. I am not looking for an answer now, but that is a wee bit concerning.

My final question is about other Departments' responses to the ending violence against women and girls strategy. First, I have to say that I do not appreciate Stewart's remarks about telling the Ministers to get the finger out; that is completely inappropriate, particularly given that they are women. How can we ensure that the ending violence against women and girls strategy does not just meet what has been agreed? The strategy was recently relaunched, which is grand, but has thought been given to what else we can do? If you listen to UTV, you will hear that, since 2020, 33 women have been killed at the hands of men — usually their partner. I know that preventative work has been done, but I am not sure that we are getting there. Has consideration been given to what we will do post 2027?

Ms Doherty: I will go back to your earlier point, Carál. I will not get into matters of individuals, but there are two things to bear in mind. First, it is important, particularly in dealing with really sensitive issues and with people who have been through trauma and difficult times, that we make sure that there is continuity. I can give the Committee an assurance that no approach that we will take would dilute the support or the service in any way; we will make sure that it is appropriately resourced. However, it is about trying to strike a balance in making sure that there is ongoing support and engagement where there ought to be. I totally take your point that that might give an impression that something has been split in half or deprioritised.

Mr Johnston: It is important to say that a transition plan is in place.

Ms Doherty: We are all particularly seized of the importance of ending violence against women and girls. In one of my previous jobs, I was responsible for the joint domestic and sexual violence and abuse strategy between Justice and Health. We now see that as a whole-society issue that involves attitudes and culture. Back when I was working on that really important work, it was more at the criminal end, rather than the preventative or attitudinal end.

Some of you were at the launch at the end of April, at which Gareth shared a story from my kitchen table. My son went through the White Ribbon training at school. I had to reflect a wee bit on my own parenting, because we had a conversation at the dinner table that I do not think that we would ever have had were it not for that training. There were things that he just was not aware of because it was not his lived experience. To borrow the phrase from EVAWG, there is something that everyone can do. In my previous role, I was very active with colleagues in the higher and further education sector, and we discussed what tertiary education could do. The universities and colleges have been really active. We also need to continue that. There will be a lot that we can do that will not necessarily require extra funding; it is about using all the assets and systems that we already have in place.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): I am very conscious of your time and of our agenda today, so I will leave it there, Carál.

I thank you all for your time today. We really appreciate it. I hope that you got a flavour of our frustration about not getting high-level updates from the Executive Office. We have the First Minister and deputy First Minister coming at the start of July, I think, but, if we had more regular engagement with senior management teams in the Executive Office —

Ms Doherty: Yes.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): — we would probably be able to assess what you are doing a lot more easily. Thank you very much for now.