Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): First of all, we have Dr Jayne Brady, head of the Northern Ireland Civil Service (NICS); Jill Minne, deputy secretary of people and organisational development; and Catherine Shannon, head of NICS HR. You are all extremely welcome. I should say, before I ask Jayne to provide an opening statement, that although we are operating, in some ways, in loco Public Accounts Committee, in following up a Northern Ireland Audit Office (NIAO) report, this is also part of a bigger and more thematic inquiry into performance and culture in the Northern Ireland Civil Service. It is an extremely important subject for the public and for policy delivery and for how our government works here. We are not just looking at the NIAO report, but we appreciate your coming and updating us on that Audit Office report. Obviously, that will form part of our questions and our inquiry.

It is also worth saying that, in addition to appreciating the time of the officials who are here today, particularly the head of the Civil Service, we do value the work of all civil servants in Northern Ireland. We appreciate that they operate under pressure, particularly in recent years, often in very unusual circumstances, and work hard to deliver public services. It is in their interest that we ask questions and hold their leaders to account. I hope that people appreciate that we are having the inquiry in that spirit.

Over to you. Thank you very much, Jayne, Jill and Catherine, for coming to see us. Please make an opening statement. Members should indicate if they wish to ask a question.

Dr Jayne Brady (Head of the Northern Ireland Civil Service): Thank you so much, Chair and Committee members, for the invitation. I welcome the Committee's inquiry into the performance and culture of the Northern Ireland Civil Service and your focus on people, leadership and management practice as central to better public service delivery. The Northern Ireland Audit Office follow-up report. 'Leading and Resourcing the Northern Ireland Civil Service', sets out clearly the scale of the challenges that the Civil Service is facing and the need for sustained pace and consistency in delivery, and I welcome that scrutiny. It is right that the Civil Service be held to account for outcomes and value for money, not simply for strategies or, indeed, intentions.

I recognise the Committee's concern about whether the system has moved fast enough. That underlines the importance of clear priorities, effective oversight and being able to demonstrate progress in a transparent and credible way. Over the past year, the people strategy has moved from a set of commitments to active delivery. Governance has been strengthened, responsibilities have been clarified and practical foundations have been put in place across recruitment, workforce planning, job architecture, policy renewal, leadership development and support for managers. That work is about improving how the system operates day to day.

Despite the unique and complex constitutional position of the Civil Service, I have taken clear and practical steps to strengthen system leadership and accountability. I concluded a permanent secretary competition, appointing four new permanent secretaries through open competition, with skills matched to posts and endorsed by Ministers. The permanent secretaries sponsor key people strategy workforce renewal initiatives, and delivery is explicitly reflected in their performance and accountability arrangements through their personal performance agreements (PPAs). Alongside that, I have maintained regular, structured and constructive engagement with the Civil Service trade union side. Trade unions are engaged early on the people strategy priorities, including workforce reform, policy renewal and pay and reward. That engagement supports delivery, helps to resolve issues early and sustains confidence as we move from design into important implementation, while accountability for delivery remains clear.

In parallel, we have strengthened oversight of vacancy management and workforce controls, because that is where delivery credibility is tested. Management information has been improved through corporate dashboards, including a dedicated vacancy management dashboard. Engagement with Departments is now more regular and structured. That supports clearer prioritisation, better sequencing of recruitment activity and more informed decisions about affordability and delivery, with accountability for workforce demand decisions remaining firmly with Departments and, of course, Ministers.

I recently wrote to all accounting officers to set out the Executive's short, time-bound and practical approach to applying a consistent grip on workforce decisions across the Northern Ireland Civil Service, particularly on recruitment. The principles of that approach are that vacancies should not be filled automatically on a like-for-like basis; Departments should be able to demonstrate that affordability and essentiality have been tested and that alternatives to recruitment have been considered; decisions should be evidence-based, drawing on existing workforce plans, dashboards and management information; where roles are critical, those should be clearly evidenced; temporary solutions, including temporary promotions, should be time-limited and kept under review; and staff and trade unions should be engaged appropriately and section 75 considerations addressed where relevant. In short, no new recruitment will be launched in the Northern Ireland Civil Service without that process being followed. NICS HR is providing each Department with a list of its live cases and will ask for a simple confirmation by an accounting officer that each vacancy remains affordable and prioritised under the control or, alternatively, should be paused or withdrawn.

Let me be clear about accountability more broadly. As head of the Civil Service, my role is to set direction, strengthen governance and hold senior civil servants and leaders collectively to account for delivery. Departments, led by their permanent secretary and Minister, remain responsible for day-to-day operational people management, resourcing decisions and service delivery. A people strategy master plan will be completed by the end of June, having completed year 1 delivery and continuing with year 2 delivery. That provides a simple, integrated road map through to 2030, setting out sequencing, dependencies, targets and the limited set of system measures that we will use to demonstrate progress. Its purpose is to embed delivery discipline across the system, not to produce another plan.

Through people strategy delivery, workforce renewal is based on three practical levers that matter most to performance, culture and value for money: a clearer workforce model through job families and professions; strategic workforce planning to move from reactive to planned workforce management; and renewed people policies, with a strong emphasis on consistent implementation and practice. If that approach is working, we will see tangible outcomes, including faster recruitment into priority roles; reduced reliance on long-running temporary promotions and affordable agency use; clearer justification for workforce size and structure; and more consistent people management practice across Departments.

I look forward to the Committee's questions. Thank you.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Thank you very much.

The first question is around a horizon view. Over the past decade, we have had the renewable heat incentive (RHI) inquiry, including in this room, at very significant cost to the public purse; a very serious report from the Northern Ireland Audit Office in 2020 that called for fundamental reform of the Civil Service, particularly its workforce; a scathing follow-up report on that from the Public Accounts Committee; and a report earlier this year from the National Audit Office that is also fairly scathing about the lack of reform of the Northern Ireland Civil Service. I think that it is fairly clear to even the most fair-minded observer that reform has fallen very far short of what people had a right to expect. What, in your view, has gone wrong?

Dr Brady: I welcome the further and follow-up reports, particularly from the Audit Office, and the response and commitments. You are right: the pace of change has not been as we would have hoped. The Audit Office report said that five of the recommendations had been delivered and 13 had been partially delivered, which is 78%, with five still not met. And I —.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): It depends on how you count. If you count "partially delivered" and talk about a glass half full —. We do not know how partly "partly" is; we do not know whether it means "slightly delivered" or "mostly delivered".

Dr Brady: I absolutely take that point. As they are classified, they were partially delivered. I recognise that that is not the pace that we should expect for Ministers or the Executive. The PAC recommendations — again, five had been achieved, five had been partially achieved and two had not been achieved. We agree fully with all the recommendations in the follow-up report from the Audit Office. Indeed, they are entrenched in the people strategy, which was reflected in the responses. There is no debate about what is the right thing to do; this is about the pace, delivery and outcomes.

I do not want to sit here and bring any excuses to bear. The pace is not as we would have wished. However, the context of that scenario was that, after my being in post for five months, the Executive collapsed for two years. We moved forward with some of the initiatives. We put in place the people plan to get some of the fundamentals right for the restored Executive. Progress has been made with that. We put a lot of effort into the consultation on the people strategy, and we engaged. Now the impetus will be to fulfil the further recommendations from that, deliver the people strategy and put in place some of the fundamentals.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): You mentioned measurable targets. I want to move on to that, because, with respect, although you talked about a lot of the correct themes, the statement that we have received from you, in both written and oral terms, was not hugely specific on targets. That might be one comment that some people make about the people strategy. I will just pick a couple of areas where we know that there are outstanding challenges. According to the NIAO report, 13% of the total Northern Ireland Civil Service headcount is on temporary promotion (TP). What is the target to reduce that, and by what date?

Dr Brady: We will talk to some of the objectives. I think that 3,700 staff are currently on TP. There are recruitment competitions in place to fill those that are included as vacancies. At a Senior Civil Service (SCS) level, to give an example from what I have delivered, we performed recruitment for the permanent secretaries to remove all the TPs from that level. We are undertaking a process of recruitment to close the TPs at grade 3 level. That has been informed by the workforce grip measures that were put in place, looking at the skills base for that to make sure that they are affordable, given the Budget context that we are in, to ensure that we are not supporting a like for like, and to look towards workforce measures — those spans of control. It is my objective to have no TPs, other than where they are required, at an SCS level by the end of this year at grade 3 and grade 5.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): By the end of this year, you want no temporary promotions in the Senior Civil Service at all?

Dr Brady: Yes, at grade 3 and grade 5. There can be strategic reasons for having temporary promotions in place, such as where there is a time-bound piece of work, where there is an objective to have that removed, or where the job is being re-evaluated. The workforce professions make it really clear that we cannot just replace a like for like. We cannot sleepwalk into doing the same things. So some of those roles are under evaluation, particularly in the area —.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): That is in the SCS, but it is really important to be specific. You mentioned that it has gone to 3,700. That is even higher. That is a significant increase on the 3,200 in the NIAO report. Presumably, that is data from late last year, so it is going up rather than down. Just so I am clear in relation to what is now the 3,700, what is the target by the end of the current people strategy? I appreciate that the target might not be met. Targets are often set to be aimed at rather than met in order to hold leaders like yourself to account, so what is the target for where that overall number should be, and by when? I do not mean just the SCS.

Dr Brady: I will bring my colleague Catherine in to speak about some of the further progress that we have made with the capacity to fill competitions. There have been a number of volume competitions to seek to fill those areas, particularly for work and pensions, which are fully funded as part of that. Those have provided the supply to be able to close the agency working areas and those that are under TPs. We look towards having a supply in place that will substantially reduce that in the coming months.

Ms Catherine Shannon (Department of Finance): There will be a significant number of competitions, Chair, from administrative officer (AO) through to deputy principal (DP) and staff officer. We have recently launched competitions for staff officers and DPs. They probably make up a large proportion of the vacancies that are currently being filled through TP arrangements. As Jayne said, from our perspective, my aim is to not to have any vacancies filled by TPs if we have an actual supply. There may be circumstances where we require a TP, such as, as Jayne said, for a special project or something that is quite short term. I have said to the Committee before that, if we have an active supply, we will very much drive forward the idea that, in that situation, there should not be any TP arrangements in Departments.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): What I am trying to ask is whether you are confident that, by the end of this year, you will be able to tell us that that number will be approximately 2,000 or 1,500, or at least on a downward trajectory? Can we hold you to that?

Ms Shannon: Yes. Once we are in a position of supply, that means that we can provide a challenge to Departments on affordability but also, if there are TP arrangements to cover a vacant position, we have active supply. We will be in a position to drive that number down and work with Departments to drive that down.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): I am really keen: by the end of this year, will we be able to see that that will be on a clear downward trajectory?

Dr Brady: Absolutely.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): It has been on an upward trajectory since the NIAO report.

Dr Brady: I can give you my commitment that that is a huge focus at departmental level. We have produced, through the dashboard systems, the ability to look at that across the service. We are taking a very active —. We need to lead at SCS level to clear grade 3 and grade 5. Also, the grade 5 cohort and the approach that we are taking, because there are substantial numbers of TPs at grade 5, is to look towards the people strategy elements, the workforce control and the strategic workforce planning. Again, it is about ensuring that it is within an affordability envelope. We have no budget. We need to show fiscal constraint. We cannot be seeking to increase —. Indeed, we need to provide provision where there may be a reduction in budgets, so we have put parameters on the pay bill that can be included this year as less than the previous year. We are also looking for an evidence base of the spans of control, so rather than an assurance necessarily from accounting officers, we are providing the data and information to validate that, actually, it is within reasonable spans of control so that we can challenge those assumptions across the service and identify hot spots, but with the trajectory that we are removing those from the service.

On the volume competitions, I do not want to try to excuse the length — seven months to fill some of those key roles — but some of the pilots that have been delivered in four recent competitions are looking to a different mechanism that fills those at volume. That has decreased the time for those pilots — they are pilots — from months to a period of 10 to 12 weeks. They are providing volume recruitment in the 600 or 700 criteria, and decisions can then be made with a fiscal lens of whether they should be deployed from that. We are creating supply rather than actually committing to jobs, because the fiscal envelope is really important. There may still need to be TPs or agency staff if we cannot afford to substantiate those roles.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): There is also the challenge of generic recruitment. I want to come on to some of the big cultural issues, but one of the big workforce critiques that has repeatedly been made about the Civil Service is reliance on generalists: a culture of generalism and a culture that is relatively closed and, for want of a better word, a bit fetid. We do not have enough secondments that are out. I understand that you came in as an external recruit, but people get the general sense that the Senior Civil Service in particular tends to be a closed shop and perhaps is not open enough and does not draw in enough professional expertise. I know that Jill and Catherine have done work on that, but when we looked at the recent deputy secretary recruitment exercise, it looked like a relatively generic exercise in recruiting people who are already waiting to be deputy secretaries and have been in the Northern Ireland Civil Service for a long time — lots of brilliant people, really able, I am sure, but not necessarily aimed at attracting people who are mid-career in the private sector or other reaches of the public sector or those who live in Dublin, London or anywhere else. What would you say to that?

Dr Brady: I would say that we absolutely need to bring in different, specialised skill sets. Indeed, the permanent secretaries that I have appointed included Mike Farrar, who has 40-plus years' experience from a health background to address the areas of specialisation and transformation that he is delivering under the direction of his Minister. I have appointed a Chief Scientific and Technology Adviser (CSTA) at the permanent secretary level, who comes from an external background with very specific skills, to establish the Office of AI and Digital.

The recent appointment competition mirrors the grade 3 competition that we did for permanent secretaries, very much in line with the focus of the people strategy. It looks towards a level of volume recruitment, but identifies each of the key roles that are there to find. The individuals will have an opportunity to discuss those roles through that process. In the permanent secretary competition, we recruited a representative from the Housing Executive into the Department for Communities, which requires specialist expertise in housing and fulfilment from a social housing perspective. Again, those are key skills that align with the Programme for Government.

We are about to go through a process to appoint a chief digital officer for the Executive to deliver some of the transformation aspects, and that person will need those professional skills. We will look as a cohort — again, this is a collective leadership aspect — in the final stages of the appointment process of individuals to those posts. We will look for a strategic skills match when we have created supply in terms of the best endeavours, as opposed to a single-level competition where there could be a volume of recruitment that is not matched more broadly to the volume of skills. It provides a substantive opportunity to get the right skills into the right place, aligned with the objectives of the people strategy.

From my recollection — Catherine can keep me right — we did an extensive process for the permanent secretary competition. We had over a hundred applications; we were substantially oversubscribed. The applicants came from a variety of different sectors, and we went through a really rigorous approach. Some of the aspects that came out of the recommendations—.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): It was mostly existing permanent secretaries who were employed.

Dr Brady: No, absolutely. Obviously, we do not have existing permanent secretaries. We have made one external appointment through that process as well.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Of the 100-plus people who applied, how many external applicants were appointed to be a permanent secretary?

Dr Brady: One of the four is external. The previous appointment to the Health permanent secretary role was an external appointment. The permanent secretary of the Department of Finance was an external appointment. However, we have many brilliant civil servants who you will have worked with. I am an external appointee as well. It is not about "internal bad, external good"; it is about getting the right people into the right roles to do the jobs.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Absolutely. We may come on to a question about secondments and giving internal staff more opportunity to get out, try new things and then, hopefully, come back.

You talked about lines of accountability. That is really important, and, frankly, I think that it is one of the biggest concerns that people have. We heard recently from Ulster University about a sense that it feels that perhaps the Senior Civil Service is not held accountable. I am sure that those people will disagree with that when they come in front of Committees like this — I appreciate that — in being held accountable, and they probably feel that they have to put up with public flak sometimes. However, there is a public demand for improved delivery, and that should pinch on us as politicians — particularly in the Executive, but all of us. It also requires us to hold the Senior Civil Service to account. Are you personally accountable, Jayne, for the state of the Civil Service? Is that something that you take personal, professional responsibility for?

Dr Brady: I think that the Committee is well aware of the constitutional arrangements in the Civil Service. I am head of the Civil Service, secretary to the Executive and principal adviser to the First Minister and the deputy First Minister. The Departments (Northern Ireland) Order 1999 gives responsibility to Ministers to organise the functions of their Departments as they see fit, and the general management of the service, under the Civil Service (Northern Ireland) Order 1999, is the responsibility of the Department of Finance. However, in the reality of the situation where we need collective leadership and collective driving, I have a hugely important role in driving this important people agenda within those constraints. I have established a Civil Service board, similar to external-type board structures. I have constituted it and reconstituted it, and I have appointed three non-exec external directors to hold us to account and to chair the committees. One of the committees delivers on the people strategy, one is about our major capital projects, which I have been here to discuss, and one is in regard to the Programme for Government. They have specific expertise. I have built into that accountability for each of the people strategy areas of delivery — the nine strands. Perm secs have personal accountability and responsibility for that, as well as collective responsibility in the NICS board. That is part of their PPA. I also engage with Ministers as to their overall priorities.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): With the greatest respect, I just asked you whether you are personally or professionally accountable or responsible for the performance of the Civil Service. I would have thought that that was a relatively straightforward yes or no answer, and you did not give me an immediate yes. Is that not a problem with our structure?

Dr Brady: I sit in the constitution realms. The Finance Minister has responsibility for the general management of the service. I believe that I am the leader to provide that leadership and hold account for my permanent secretaries in that constitutional position, and I take that extremely seriously. I do not want to talk over the governance arrangements, but it is my responsibility to lead this service, to create whatever soft structures or performance management aspects make sure that the people strategy is delivered. However, that strategy is under the ownership of the Finance Minister. Those are the constitutional realities, just as it is the responsibility for each Minister in each Department to organise their Department as they see fit.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Is this not the problem, though? You are the head of the Civil Service, but you are not ultimately responsible for reform of it.

Dr Brady: I am not ultimately responsible as accounting officer, so I do not have all the hard levers. The reform and the policy changes are the responsibility of the Finance Minister, because that is how our constitution works.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Neither Jill nor Catherine — the able officials who are here with you; no slight on either them or you — you do not line manage either of them.

Dr Brady: No, I do not line manage them.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Do you think it is a sustainable situation to have the head of the Civil Service —? Most people publicly expect you to be responsible — not just you, but the role; it is not necessarily a personal thing — for overall improvement of the Civil Service, but you have just said that you do not have the levers to deliver it. It is effectively a kind of leadership. Perhaps it is a figurehead. Perhaps it is a kind of soft — I think that you used the word "soft" — leadership role, rather than a hard, "I am accountable for delivering on these metrics" role. Is that not a fundamental problem?

Dr Brady: There have been recommendations in the past regarding a single accounting officer principal for my role. I applied for this job and I took the role in the reality of the constitutional position that I am in. However, I do not abdicate the responsibility, so I am here driving leadership across the service. The grip that has been put in place, for example — I do not have hard levers to deliver that grip, but I have put grip in place regarding recruitment and retention for those areas. I have asked accounting officers to make sure that that is within an affordability parameter. That can be overridden by their Ministers for very good reasons, and that is within their role. However, actually that is the collective leadership. I ask my permanent secretaries to provide a collective leadership in the realm of the fiscal sustainability aspect that we have. So you can say that they are hard or soft, but that is the way that we need to work to make business work. When you have to revert to your hard vires, I think that that is the sticking place.

However, I have to be really clear: no civil servant sets the direction. The direction is set by our Ministers, the Programme for Government and the Executive. That is the reality for every civil servant who comes to take their job. It is not for me to create a shadow role but to take the role that I know that the Ministers and the Executive want me to take to lead the Civil Service within the constitutional reality. I do not think that those two are insurmountable to deliver. They could be used as an excuse for me not to be held to account, but I am really happy to be here and to be held to account for how we deliver on the people strategy in the days, months and years ahead. While I do not line-manage Catherine or Jill, we engage incredibly frequently. There are very few days when I do not have engagement regarding, "Where is the performance of this?", and bringing that into the overall reporting to our senior leadership team, as well as the NICS board.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): I appreciate that. That is something that we will want to reflect on. I am going to bring in others.

Ms Forsythe: Thank you all for being here today. In my previous role on the Public Accounts Committee, we touched on some of these things. It is very much how it looks to the public when things are happening and there is an unclear leadership and accountability chain, and it is about trying to understand how that sits. We are here as the Finance Committee, the Department of Finance has a central coordinating role, and you are the head of the Civil Service. I want to tease that out a bit.

There is a paragraph in your submission to the Committee about leadership and accountability, but it is still not completely clear who is holding whom to account and how. As the head of the Northern Ireland Civil Service, how do you hold permanent secretaries to account?

Dr Brady: I hold them to account in a variety of different forums. Thank you for the question. First, there is the Civil Service board. We had our board meeting yesterday, and we had an agenda item on the people strategy. We have a programme of work that we deliver. Those are the commitments in terms of delivering on the recommendations of the Audit Office and those areas. There is also a subset of those permanent secretaries who are members of the people committee, which is chaired by an external non-executive member. Again, we have a programme of delivery under that. Jill is the senior responsible officer (SRO) for that delivery. Of the nine elements in the people strategy, I have defined as part of their PPAs that they have responsibility for one of those clear leadership developments. Delivering on the people strategy is not actually a Department of Finance issue or just my issue; it needs to be a whole-of-service issue. That was a really important ask for them to step up and lead.

We will then be getting the dashboards that are being progressed as part of that overall analysis to make sure that we deliver on the KPIs, most importantly for the Audit Office follow-up recommendations, but also in the areas where we need to deliver short-term performance. NICS HR provides dashboards and information to our permanent secretaries in respect of where we are with TPs, so that we can close down that important work that we talked about earlier, but also look at the time to fill, so holding those to account across the service. A fourth reflection is the element of grip, and I have looked across the service so that we are not going out to recruit deputy secretaries, or indeed grade 5s, in a departmental focus. We need to have looked at their spans of control. I am interrogating those spans of control, and it is not like-for-like to ensure that there is a challenge function. As we have the data and information to deliver on that, it is a further cascade.

The next aspect is that, as I go through my cycle of end-of-year reviews and forward planning with my permanent secretaries, I will look at their sickness levels, I will look at their skills and provisions, I will look at their level of TPs, and I will look at the key areas of succession planning and how they are delivering that. That will be a key performance metric. I will also interrogate the people survey results from their Departments and how their people plans deliver. They each have individual people plans that deliver into the Department. I have met all the boards of the Departments to emphasise the requirement for them to deliver on the people plan. I have met all the non-executive members of the boards as well. The people survey will be the next feedback to get that cultural perspective. I also meet formally twice yearly with all Ministers on a one-to-one basis to understand how their Departments are performing against the requirements, to find out about their permanent secretaries' behaviour and how they are resourcing and delivering on those priorities. Those are the aspects that I have put in place to provide some level of grip and control in respect of this environment.

Ultimately, we will be reporting on the people strategy delivery through the reports, and that will be through the Finance Minister. It is also integrated into the Programme for Government as a core element. Our Ministers and Executive have agreed the reform and transformation, and there are many different aspects that need to be delivered. In my view, we cannot deliver anything for the people of Northern Ireland if we do not deliver and grasp those important issues.

That gives you a reflection of some of the layers. Jill, I do not know whether I have missed anything.

Ms Forsythe: That is not really what I asked. I appreciate the structures, the strategy and the governance, and it is good to have those in place, but on the delivery of the work right across the Northern Ireland Civil Service, there is a real culture and perception that there are no consequences when things go wrong.

I saw that in a number of pieces of work that the Public Accounts Committee did. That is not a good look for us as politicians, however. When things go wrong, the public ask us what we are doing. When things go wrong at different structural levels, there seems to be a culture of there being no consequences. We have seen senior civil servants be moved around, but, outwardly, there do not appear to have been consequences. What do you do to hold individuals to account for things that have gone badly wrong and caused there to be a bad public perception of our public services? Have you any examples of where you have acted and of what the consequences of doing that have been? I want to draw out practical examples rather than hear about the strategy.

Dr Brady: I obviously cannot comment on individual cases, which the Audit Office report reflected. I therefore cannot get into those areas. When the Executive were restored, I put in place the new performance management structures that I have talked about. Those were also reflected in the Audit Office report. I have also put in place a system beyond the two categorisations — there are now four categorisations — and for the different delivery areas, and I manage the performance approval process. It is not appropriate for me to comment on those specifically, however. We are now looking at the performance management framework as part of the policy refresh. I will ask Jill to comment on that. We also have statistics that show how we are dealing with poor performance.

Ms Shannon: We have statistics on warnings and dismissals.

Dr Brady: I will ask Catherine to comment on those statistics.

Ms Forsythe: What about beyond the operational elements, however? I am talking about things that bring our public services into such disrepute. For example, the Department for the Economy recently held an event. We have seen a note from a meeting about Cantor Fitzgerald between the Minister and her officials on which there were only three bullet points. Three hundred jobs were lost to Northern Ireland, about which there was significant coverage in the press, but the meeting note, which senior civil servants produced, contained just three bullet points on something so significant. When such stories come out, people ask questions. Is that good enough? Is that what we should expect to see on file? Again, what is your role? When something such as that happens and gets such bad press, do you, as the head of the Civil Service, interject and ask the Department what is going on?

Dr Brady: I obviously cannot discuss the specifics of individual cases, because that is personal information. I can assure you, however, that, over the past number of months, I have been engaging proactively on a variety of issues to do with areas in which I felt that the service was potentially not delivering, in order to understand the origination of those issues. Issues come to my door in the form of external requests, and I take them seriously and consider them fully. There are aspects that involve personal information, and no organisation will divulge that information, because it cuts across all areas. I can assure you, however, that there is no complacency in dealing with such issues, because part of this involves holding ourselves to the standards that we expect from others. Managing poor performance was one of the findings of the Audit Office report. I will ask Jill to come in on that.

Ms Jill Minne (Department of Finance): I know what you are saying, Diane, but, from day to day, performance is either a matter of capability or a matter of misconduct, and there are policies in place. The issue is either a performance management one or a wilful act of misconduct. As I said, there are policies in place, which cascade to each Department. A line manager is therefore responsible. I cannot get into examples, but if I were to quote any example, I would say that it is a person's line manager who is responsible for their performance.

You asked how the head of the Civil Service knows what is going on. Jayne, or the head of any Civil Service, will be across the management information and know how things are sitting when it comes to discipline, performance management and so on. The head of the service can look at that only at a high level. It is the responsibility of each Department and each line manager to implement the legally compliant policies that we have in place to manage performance, underperformance or misconduct. Those policies have to be properly and robustly implemented in each Department by the relevant line manager, whomever that is.

Ms Forsythe: It is important for us to be able to see that leadership at the most senior levels of the Civil Service and for members of the public to be able to feel that there is scrutiny at that level. I just —.

Dr Brady: I also meet all the Ministers. At a minimum, I meet them every six months to get feedback. Over the past couple of days, I have met four Ministers in order to understand their issues. I am therefore very live to the fact that we need to be responsive to all issues, as well as to the public discourse. We need to build confidence as well, but that does not mean that Departments themselves do not have responsibility.

Catherine, do you want to speak about some of the more operational changes?

Ms Shannon: Yes. Our role is to support line managers to have robust discussions. You are absolutely right to say that, if there is a lack of visible action being taken in certain circumstances, that potentially creates a lack of credibility in the service. As Jayne said, however, we have done a lot of work over the past year to 18 months to be more robust in providing support where behaviours or conduct have not been what we would expect, and we have then acted accordingly. We have operational figures and dashboards so that we can look at the number of dismissals or warnings. It is not a yardstick that we want to use, but we are ensuring that discussions are increasing year-on-year, so it is for us to support line managers with day-to-day management and to challenge. Also, we are sending clear messages to say, "Look, that will be challenged. That will be robustly supported". It could be a capability or capacity issue. It is therefore about us looking at the whole picture to ensure that we are supporting Departments with the work that they need to do.

Ms Forsythe: My other question is about capacity and capability. Different Audit Office reports have identified — we have heard this in different Committee evidence sessions — significant gaps in particular skill sets in some professional roles. While all this is going on, I see that, this week, you have gone out to recruit for 11 Senior Civil Service deputy secretary/chief executive roles at grade 3. Those are jobs with salaries that start at £113,000 per annum, plus the pension contribution. Those jobs are paid at a higher rate than those of Ministers in Northern Ireland, out of public-sector funds. They are permanent contracts that will cost well in excess of £1 million in salaries every year. Those posts, in different Departments, are so senior and really specialised. For example, you have vacancies in the Department of Finance, the Department of Health and the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, and you are also potentially recruiting engineers. People at that senior level in the private sector would most likely want to apply for a very senior financial or medical role or for a very senior engineering role in the Department for Infrastructure.

By advertising them as general roles, are you potentially missing out on the specialist skills that certain roles will require? The deputy secretary in the Department of Finance is fantastic, and we will really miss her. A lot of very senior finance people in the private sector would probably go for that specific role, but they would not necessarily apply for a generic role. Why do you think that having generalist roles at that grade are the best for such significant positions?

Dr Brady: That is explicitly why all the roles that are being recruited for were identified. It is not a general service competition. They are posts that fit the specific roles. That will be part of the process, as it was part of the process for the permanent secretary roles. A general set of core competency skill sets are required at leadership level, but the role that they will be delivering will be identified in the same way in which it was for the permanent secretary competition.

Ms Forsythe: Should the posts be advertised in that way? That advertisement has gone out for grade 3 Civil Service roles. I follow a lot of finance groups on my social media, but I will not be pinged about that advertisement, nor will people working in finance, because the post is not advertised as being for a deputy secretary in the Department of Finance. You are therefore not hitting headhunter sites, which are looking for specific skills. Might it therefore not be better to reflect on that advertisement and instead advertise for specific roles in order to make sure that people who are really good in their field but are not actively looking for a job see a significant opportunity for them to apply for a high-paid Civil Service job in a specialised post?

Ms Shannon: One of the pieces of work that we did with Departments was on trying to identify some of those roles. You are absolutely right that there are very specific roles that would require a separate competition, but, as Jayne said, there is a baseline level of experience and skills that we require from a senior civil servant at that level. Further detail in the candidate information booklet does identify what each of the 11 posts is. The recruitment process is a robust selection process involving an application form, psychometric testing and then interview.

People who come through the process will be allocated a post that will be very much tailored to their particular skill set and what they can bring to the post. We will determine who is best suited to a position. Given the associated costs, we thought about whether we should run 11 separate competitions or advertise the posts as a cohort. We asked what specific skill sets we require of all our grade 3s across the Civil Service and how we might use the selection process and interviews to allocate some of the roles to the people with the best skills for them.

We have linked in with our executive search agencies to do some of that reaching out for us. We did that successfully with the permanent secretary recruitment process. For more specialist roles, we are very much moving towards looking at job families. We are definitely thinking that, for a grade 5 competition for specialist roles, we will look through the lens of job families and take a professional view when it comes to filling vacancies.

Ms Forsythe: Do you not think that a job with a six-figure salary, for which someone who may have 20 years' experience in a very specific profession might apply, should be advertised in isolation? They are really significant jobs.

Dr Brady: They absolutely are significant jobs. We are not advertising them as you say. We are advertising them as specific roles in areas that are defined in the candidate information booklet, which sets out the specifics of the role. We are promoting the roles on that basis.

The roles are not new. Our plan, as we discussed earlier, is to have a strategy to end all the temporary promotions. When we went out to all Departments, I asked for assurances that we would not be replacing like with like when it came to the job family. Indeed, a number of the positions will not be filled and will remain TPs, because those jobs are being evaluated. There will be input from Ministers about the need for more specialised types of roles. It is not a about finding a like-for-like replacement.

There were two specific categories. One was the generalist, leadership and policy development roles, and the other was the specific chief executive roles, which are defined in that same booklet. That looks towards striking a balance between taking a broader perspective by getting value for money by running a single competition that can provide us with people at those kinds of grades and still focusing on the jobs and the criteria.

The first stage of the process will be generic. It will be about having the core competencies and skills. The second stage will be specialised and be tailored to the specifics of the role, and the permanent secretaries will be involved on the panel.

Ms Forsythe: Hopefully, when that happens, we will see the gaps in specific skill sets at senior levels be addressed.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): I must add a comment here, because I think that it is a legitimate comment to make. If I were a very specific type of highly sought-after engineer, accountant, astronaut, physicist or whatever, I would not necessarily be drawn to the advert. I might just think, "That is for civil servants who are floating around at the grade beneath". We need to overcome a deep cultural challenge, so it is important that we see progress made there.

Mr Harvey: Thank you, ladies. Dr Brady, can the Northern Ireland Civil Service continue to operate at its current capacity, given the considerable number of vacancies that it has?

Dr Brady: Yes. Our dashboards are being updated to reflect the vacancy numbers. I was checking the stats on the current vacancies for which recruitment is under way. At the end of February, 5,000 were listed, which was in line with figures in the Audit Office report. I emphasise that 1,600 of those are fully funded by the Department for Work and Pensions. They are brilliant new jobs, and they are a testament to how brilliantly the people whom we have in Northern Ireland provide those the facilities for a UK Department. There is therefore full cost recovery for those jobs.

A further 3,700 are TPs. Those 5,000 posts are therefore not vacancies. As I said, 1,700 people are fulfilling the DWP work, but recruiting to those 3,700 posts will end those TPs that we have when it comes to the standing orders. That is not to say that there will be an additional 5,000 posts for the Civil Service. Indeed, from looking at analysis of the Civil Service over the past seven years, the workforce has grown by 0·7%. That is all accounted for under DWP and Windsor framework recruitment.

From the point of view of overall delivery of services. the Civil Service has not grown in size. Over that same period, however, our arm's-length bodies (ALBs) have grown by 1·77%.

What is important to note is that this is not just about the size of the Civil Service but about the skills that we have. As we discussed earlier, it is important that we have the right skills complement. We also need to keep the full workforce cost of the service under control. We have significant attrition, which we are looking at very intentionally, but we also need to make sure that we have a strategic workforce model and plan that is built on the job families and professions as well as a span of workforce controls to determine would be expected.

Ms Minne: The crux of your question is this: what assurances do we have that we are the right shape and size? That is for what the plan is in place. First, the new workforce model moves away from taking a general service-type approach. That has been designed now, and we are going through the process of putting every role into that model. From that, the strategic workforce plan will follow, and it will be exactly that. It will ask how many vacancies we need to fill. That will be based on all sorts of things, such as turnover rate and what Departments are saying about their delivery and their skill sets. Central guidance has been issued, and every Department has been asked to develop its own workforce plan within a certain time frame. When we get that from them, each of the nine departmental strategic workforce plans will be aggregated in one workforce plan for the Civil Service. Effectively, it is about what we can afford, what the right skills are, what the number and nature of jobs are and what the size and shape of the service is.

Mr Harvey: Are you making the maximum effort to fill those vacancies at present? Is there no more that you can do?

Ms Shannon: At the moment, as we said, we have a number of vacancies at a number of different grades. We are currently in the process of allocating AO and 500-plus executive officer 2 (EO2) posts. We are therefore filling a significant number of those vacancies. We are not adding to our headcount through spending on agency staff to fill vacancies, but, over the coming months, you will very much see a reduction in the number of vacancies that are currently in our caseload.

Dr Brady: From an agency perspective, DWP's mode of operation was to have a 70% reliance on agency spend, which showed in the increase that came out of the Audit Office's follow-up report. It has now flipped that to 30%, so there is a drive in recruitment to rebalance that percentage to bring it down to nominal levels. Again, those are full cost recoveries. From our dashboard's perspective, that is confusing, because it looks as though the Civil Service is growing or that we have actual vacancies that are not funded by an external organisation, or, indeed, that we are closing the gap through the number of TPs that there are. Where we have TPs and agency workers, that allows us an important principle for delivery of the skills that we need, which the Deputy Chair mentioned. There will be an expectation that, as we have attrition, and we are fulfilling those TPs, they are not being delivered in an organisation on a like-for-like basis. It is about how we thoughtfully interrogate that. That is the process that we are undertaking, so it is not just about like for like. One of the key deliverables as part of the people strategy is digital skills, key digital enabling, the roll-out of Copilot across the service and the applications that AI will bring. In a positive way, that will free up people to be more focused on the areas in which they can add a differential in value. As we interrogate that, it will allow us an opportunity, and we should not just sleepwalk into fulfilling like for like.

Mr Harvey: I was going to ask you about your plans to reduce your reliance on agency staff, but you said that the percentage has been reduced from 70% to 30% already.

Dr Brady: That is from the —.

Ms Shannon: The delivery of the DWP contract originally involved 70% agency staff and 30% permanent NICS staff, but that percentage has changed. The reduction in agency staff numbers is very much linked to our work to create supply. There will always be a certain component in DWP, for example, or in the delivery of the Windsor framework that will involve agency staff, because it is short-term work, and it is easier to manage in that way for particular skills. Having supply will help us drive down agency spend as well.

Dr Brady: Catherine will correct me if I am wrong, but we anticipate that there will be a substantive reduction in agency staff numbers by a very significant factor through the recent competitions. That will create that supply. The 10- to 12-week fulfilment criteria that have been provided as part of those pilots address the other issue as part of the follow-up recommendations.

Mr Harvey: What is your view on the key drivers of high sickness absence?

Dr Brady: Sickness absence is a complex issue, and levels are not consistent across the service. We had our Civil Service board meeting yesterday at the Maghaberry well-being hub. The Northern Prison Service (NIPS) has some of the highest sickness absence rates. There are, I think, 13·4 days lost a year, which is down from 13·8 days, so there has been some marginal improvement. The statistics show us — I review them with colleagues and permanent secretaries as part of the annual review — that mental health, stress disorders and some physical aspects are the main issues. Again, that varies among some industrial workers. We have done some initial work to address those issues. Sickness absence comes at a significant cost to the public purse — I think that a figure of £48 million was identified in the Audit Office report — so we are working proactively to try to address it. First, we are providing the basics through healthcare professionals, doctors and nurses. Secondly, we are focusing on particular areas in Departments. I know that some work has been trialled in DFC and DOF. Catherine, do you want to talk about that.

Ms Shannon: Yes. We use our internal management information to try to drill down into the reasons for absence and to be more focused and proactive in our work. We have commissioned a piece of work with colleagues in the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) that looks at our absences so that we can determine, and be a bit more focused on, how we put interventions in place.

For example, in a small pocket in one of our Departments, we took a more holistic approach. To address work-related stress, we worked with line managers and brought in the occupational health service. There was a more wrap-around approach taken, and, with that focus, we have seen a 40% reduction in work-related stress. In our Department, there has been a more aggressive approach taken to managing and tackling long-term absence.

The approach is multifaceted. Given that people in different parts of our organisation, such as Prison Service staff or industrial staff, have different needs and different requirements, it is about looking at different ways of tackling absence. Our team was recently out with industrial staff in some of the depots and brought in occupational health teams in order for them to understand and get a feel for what the work is like. We have a physio in place. If injuries are an issue for staff in those areas, providing physiotherapy is a more appropriate way for us to manage their absence. It is therefore about looking at the issues from a global perspective and being very proactive and very focused on the different needs of the staff groups in each Department.

Dr Brady: We have set up forums with the PSNI, the Education Authority (EA) and the health trusts to tackle mental health issues and other common issues. Take the example of the multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) model that is being rolled out by the Department of Health. Once you have the basics of immediacy of care, it is about mental health provision and musculoskeletal work. It is therefore about providing a more holistic range of responses. Although the improvements have been incremental, some of the figures that have not gone through the NISRA cycle yet show some indications.

Ms Shannon: There was a slight reduction shown in the previous two NISRA reports, and even our management information shows a continued downward trajectory. That information does not have the same robustness as NISRA's statistics, but any reduction in our absence levels is always very welcome. We are starting to see that in our management information, so we want to continue to drive that. Again, high absence levels continue to be an added pressure on staff. If we can start addressing that either by ensuring that staff do not go off sick in the first place or by bringing them back to work wee bit more quickly, that will help our general effort to improve the experience of staff at work.

Dr Brady: That is one of the areas that we may want to explore once we get into understanding the issues at play in order to set and drive targets across the service.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): I would certainly like to see —. Sorry, are you finished, Harry?

Mr Harvey: I will finish with this: what is your view on the impact of hybrid working on productivity, staff attendance and so on?

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): With the greatest respect, I ask that you keep your answers as concise as possible. It is not that I want to curtail members or witnesses, but we have lots of things to get through. Go ahead. Sorry.

Dr Brady: Thank you. We now have a hybrid working policy, with work plans in place for Departments. Across the service, 40% of time is to be spent in the office. We engaged with the trade unions on that.

I expect that the SCS has a higher attendance of staff in the office. It is important to recognise that not all civil servants or Departments have the ability to provide hybrid working. Indeed, I have never worked in a hybrid capacity, and no one in my office does. We are in the office every day. That is not to say that that is a better model, but it is the reality. We see industrial staff out working. My colleagues in the Prison Service, whom I saw yesterday, are out working. Overall, flexible working is provided based on need and service delivery.

Flexible working works both ways. The nature of delivering for the public service means that there are occasions when you have to work outside normal hours, with weekend and evening working. Therefore, there has to be a level of flexibility. Our permanent secretary cadre is looking at the roll-out and impact of flexible working in Departments, engaging with Ministers. We do not have any specific productivity metrics in the service, as you will be aware.

Ms Minne: The trick is to make sure that you have a policy that strikes the right balance. There are pros and cons to hybrid working. It has a highly positive impact for people who are able to do hybrid working, but there are also a lot of benefits to actually being in the workplace. Hybrid working is not a contractual right. Therefore, it has to be based on business need. It comes back to line managers to determine whether a particular post can be done through hybrid working. Ultimately, business need comes first. That is the impact. Then, there are other benefits: its being green, its involving less travel and all those types of things. Maybe not my generation but my kids' generation expect to see it offered when they apply for jobs, whether that is in the private sector or the big four. People are hybrid working. When people apply for jobs, that is a big factor in their view of what type of employer we are. It is all part of the employer value proposition. On overall impact, it is about getting the right balance and making sure that it is applied consistently across all Departments.

Mr Harvey: OK. Thank you very much.

Miss Dolan: Thank you very much for coming in. Kind of following on from Harry and kind of not: I think that hybrid working is a good thing. I am from Fermanagh, and hybrid working opens up opportunities for workers. Given the concerns around over-centralisation in Belfast, what specific steps are you taking to improve regional balance in recruitment, promotion and location of Departments, particularly west of the Bann?

Dr Aiken: Mentioning Fermanagh would probably help.

Ms Minne: Asking for a friend.

Miss Dolan: Belleek, if you want. [Laughter.]

Dr Brady: All politics is local.

One of the great offerings of the Civil Service is that it serves the people of this place. It has to be representative of and grounded in the people. I have had the pleasure of going out to many of our sites. I have met the teams in Ballykelly, Fermanagh and Omagh. I have seen the diversity of applications. You are right about the ability and flexibility to work in different locations, and some hubs have provided those alternative working plans. The very significant volume of recruitment that we did for AOs was in the north-west. We advertised that at a Northern Ireland level, but that signalled that there is not just a Belfast perspective. Do either of you have any information on that?

Ms Shannon: Under that model, we attempted to do region-specific recruitment. We are very much looking towards that. We have premises and estates across the patch, and we recruit to vacancies in all corners of the North. We will use the region-specific model that we had with the AO recruitment, so that we are not concentrating on Belfast for some of the posts in which there is a big volume of vacancies.

Miss Dolan: Perfect. Thank you for that.

Dr Brady: We are mindful of it in our events. At a Senior Civil Service level, our NICS board yesterday was in Lisburn yesterday. The previous external one was at the Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service. The now annual event of remembrance of those who died in service is at the College of Agriculture, Food and Rural Enterprise (CAFRE). Therefore, we are providing places that are centrally focused for all the people in the Civil Service.

Miss Dolan: Fermanagh has great locations too, so if you want any [Inaudible.]

Dr Brady: Yes, indeed. [Laughter.]

Miss Dolan: My other question is about the reports and the theme of the Civil Service working in a siloed approach. What are your thoughts on that? Do you agree that that is the case?

Dr Brady: Historically, there has been siloed working. To be candid, that is still the case in some areas. In the constitutional structure that we have, there are nine separate Departments. That is a reality that has allowed us to have such a positive outcome in the past 28 years. The reality is that Ministers have autonomy over their Departments. There is no Cabinet-led responsibility. Only complex, controversial and cross-cutting issues come to the Executive. There is a lack of that responsibility. I am not a single accounting officer, so I have that ability to collectively lead. That is why I have put in place all the structures — I will not rehearse them again — as part of the NICS board: what is our common cause and common delivery, and what are the core elements that we need to deliver for our Ministers and the people of Northern Ireland? It is about sorting out the major capital projects, delivering the Programme for Government and getting our people aligned in doing so. That cannot be done in a single Department. I know that the Department of Finance gets the responsibility for lots of that from the PAC because of the nature of it, but, actually, it is about all our services joining together. The major capital projects are big, significant areas, but we have enabling actions that unpick some of those cross-cutting areas to prevent a silo-based approach.

Ultimately, it is about culture. The culture starts at the top — at permanent secretary level and at my level — when it comes to encouraging collective leadership and, indeed, mandating it. That is a key theme. It is about enabling action. Collective leadership is different from collaborative leadership, where there is a quid pro quo-type aspect. You look at what the collective aspect is that needs to be delivered and ensure that that is done. In our permanent secretary recruitment competition — in advertising those roles — we attracted some specialist skills. The first stage was on managing public money and governance, as you would expect. The second stage of that competition — the interview — was about how you act collectively. Candidates had to show how they can deliver collectively, where they look towards the overall aspect and transformation, without cross-cutting a single departmental aspect. Through our process, we are now looking for those collective leadership skills. Our permanent secretaries now have collective responsibility, as part of the people strategy, to deliver.

I have to say that I am hugely encouraged by the amount that has been delivered. The pilot in the north-west was delivered through the Department for Communities, which had a lead from the supply perspective. That Department initiated that itself and drove it through. The Department of Finance and NICS HR were the delivery partners, but it was the responsibility of the Department for Communities to deliver for the service. It delivered capacity for itself, but, actually, it delivered overall. The lead for digital is the permanent secretary of the Department for the Economy. That is really important, and we are very close to that delivery. That will deliver across the service. Those are the aspects where we need collective leadership, aligned with the skills and the necessities of that perspective. To me, that is the single biggest issue that we will need to drive forward. I can put structures, accountability and everything in place, but, unless we give that effect —. That is a leadership piece and a culture and values piece.

Miss Dolan: This is my last question. When it comes to the recommendations in the report, do you see that as the biggest issue in the Civil Service that needs to be fixed?

Dr Brady: It is necessary, but doing only that is not sufficient. There are many issues that are very clearly called out. There are seven recommendations. The delivery of Integr8 will be a game changer for the service. It will provide the data and information, both from a finance, joined up —. Many of the aspects that we are trying to interrogate here have come about because we do not have the management information to make clear recommendations or predictions. Integr8 will be a fundamental enabler of those things. More siloed structures have been created because you cannot get the information. However, unless you have the culture of the collective aspect —. I see that amongst my Civil Service team.

Miss Dolan: Thank you very much.

Dr Aiken: Thanks, Jayne and everybody, for coming in. I have a couple of questions. Jayne, you said earlier — I thought that it was quite marked:

If you believe that you are the leader, what is your vision for the Northern Ireland Civil Service?

Dr Brady: I am the head of the Northern Ireland Civil Service. I do not have the policy responsibility. My vision for the Civil Service, put simply, is a service that delivers for our Ministers and the people of Northern Ireland and that delivers the Programme for Government to make things better. That requires us to be innovative, skilled and delivery focused: those are the key principles that are embodied in the people strategy, which is one of the levers through which we deliver. Delivery is really important. We must move from strategy to implementation, and that is where we are with the people strategy. The one-year people plan delivered some of the fundamentals. We have all the architecture in place. The Audit Office report underscores everything that needs to be done. We have done the first level of delivery. It is now about making sure that it is delivered consistently across Departments, and ensuring that they have the management information to be held to account in this forum and to hold ourselves to account on delivery.

Dr Aiken: OK. Most organisations will have this up front: "I'm the leader. Follow me. Here's the vision statement. This is where I want to go. This is the mission statement and how I'm going to achieve it". What are your personal KPIs to achieve that?

Dr Brady: As I said, it is about being an innovative and skilled Civil Service that delivers for our Executive and government, and which is focused on delivery and improving aspects to make things better for people. Evidence bases will be provided. There are seven recommendations in the Audit Office report that underscore how to deliver them. There is the outcome that you look towards and focus on, but there are also KPIs that show that you are on the right trajectory. Some of those are fundamental and are about taking the time to skill up; to replace staff and deal with sickness levels; and to do performance management. Those feed into delivery of the Programme for Government and how we support our Ministers to meet the objectives that they have signed up to and, indeed, the capital projects.

In the feedback to the last people survey, which was last year, we saw an improvement in seven out of the nine areas that were tested; one stayed the same, and one went down by 1%. However, that was improvement from a low base; we need to have much more ambition for delivery. We also have the NISRA statistics that show the level of confidence and trust in the Civil Service, which is massively important. There is about 74% trust in the Civil Service. There are many different aspects to it.

Dr Aiken: What you have explained is the Civil Service looking at itself. What external methods do you have to check that the KPIs are being met?

Dr Brady: The NISRA stats, which are independently qualified, show the Northern Ireland population's trust in the Civil Service. That is really important, because, globally, trust in government structures and public service is important. That is an external metric. Our Executive and Ministers have signed up to deliver on the Programme for Government commitments. There will be published reporting on that. The Civil Service will deliver on those aspects, and it will be held to account by those structures, which will be part of delivery.

We are not a growing Civil Service, but we are filling some of our vacancies. The indications from people who want to join and be part of the Civil Service are that we are open, transparent and welcoming. That is reflected in the number of applications that we have had in those processes. Northern Ireland has the lowest unemployment rates of anywhere on these islands, yet we get very substantial numbers of applications and high approval levels. Many different metrics are required to deliver and support our Executive and Ministers.

Dr Aiken: You have been the head of the Northern Ireland Civil Service since 2021; correct?

Dr Brady: Since September 2021, yes.

Dr Aiken: September 2021. How does it make you feel when you see the Northern Ireland Audit Office state in its report:

Dr Brady: I agree that we need to be absolutely focused on delivery. I called out the statistics: the 78% that we have delivered, and the 5% that we have not. I agree with all the findings; I do not refute any of them. There has to be a focus on delivery; absolutely. We had two years with no Executive, when some of my focus was on working with the parties to restore the Executive and get a Programme for Government. We have had a cost-of-living crisis, the war in Ukraine and refugees coming. We built a Programme for Government but also outlined the challenges, including the fiscal challenges.

However, it is not sufficient to say that difficult things have happened and stand down from my leadership role. My job is to address all those things in parallel. The people strategy structures that are now in place were supported by the Audit Office findings and align with its further recommendations. It is now about delivery and having KPIs that prove to us and you that we are delivering. The trick is to deliver consistently. We can have all the great strategies and policies in the world, but one of our issues has been with not delivering consistently. It is about ensuring that we have the management information and structures to hold people to account across Departments on those key delivery aspects.

Dr Aiken: I have two short questions. One of the comments that has come through is about how delivery is demonstrated. I think that the Deputy Chair alluded to this: there is real concern about the Department for Infrastructure's spending £200 million but no roads being built; DAERA's taking court cases that it had no chance of winning; and issues in Health with trying to build hospitals that cannot seem to be built. We are absolutely awful at procurement and all the rest of it. There is always a degree of political failure; as you quite rightly said, we were down for two years. However, there has also been a real failure in leadership and delivery from the whole Senior Civil Service. Inept management, for want of better terminology, has cost us more than a quarter of a billion pounds. You talk about how delivery is being demonstrated, but how do you answer those questions?

Dr Brady: Of course, Ministers run their Departments. Within that, there is Programme for Government delivery, the delivery of major capital projects and their departmental policy priorities. As part of my engagement with Ministers, I go through those to understand where they are, but, to inform those discussions, I get analysis. On major capital projects, for example, it has been identified that there are nine enabling actions —.

Dr Aiken: You are also the chair of the transformation board; are you not?

Dr Brady: I am the chair of the transformation board as well.

I have discussions with those individuals to identify the underlying aspects that are impeding the delivery of, for example, major capital projects. There were 140 recommendations in the synthesis of work that we looked at. Where are the key aspects that are preventing progress? Legislation is a core aspect of that. It is cross-cutting. On the Deputy Chair's points, the skills and capability piece for major capital projects was also a key issue, as was providing the Major Projects Leadership Academy (MPLA) training, which is built into the skills provision and cuts across into the people strategy. The social licence is another key aspect that has not been delivered consistently. Those are the mechanisms for delivering that approach.

One of the other recommendations was about having data and information so that we can monitor those projects and hold people to account for all of them. We have a system called data map, which some of you who have sat on the PAC may be aware of. We now have 47 of the major projects on that, so we can interrogate across those systems and have consistent information. We use that to do deep dives. We have done deep dives into the Department of Education's capital and the Department of Health — it is being done now — to assist Departments and Ministers in identifying those areas. It is about the underlying trends. Integr8 will give us the underlying trends for Finance and HR. Those have been difficult to identify. We will then be able to identify the hot spots on which we can have a more strategic focus.

My engagement is with the permanent secretaries. There are cross-cutting areas, which we manage as part of the Civil Service board. We manage the deliverables with the permanent secretaries. I will have met their Ministers in advance to hear about their concerns in the key areas of behaviours, functions and performance when it comes to major capital projects and the Programme for Government —.

Dr Aiken: You can understand the scepticism across Northern Ireland about the delivery of major public procurement projects. The senior leadership of the Civil Service has been involved in those issues.

Dr Brady: There are certainly learnings to take in that regard. I acknowledge that. The experience with the A5 is not just about cost; it is about the implications for lives and the complexity of the legal structures.

Dr Aiken: People's lives are being held up by what seems to be, to quote somebody else, an "inept" approach to delivery of the project.

Dr Brady: I would unpick that: the delay is largely due to the complexity of the legal, environmental, planning and social licence environment in which we now work. Those are key areas that we have to look across. We need to take the learnings. We had a session yesterday about a revised procurement approach, which will look to address some of the underlying concerns. When it comes to transformation, there is no big switch to make everything correct. Some of it is —.

Dr Aiken: That is very important. You have mentioned the word "culture" a couple of times. Some of us have been politicians long enough to remember recommendations from the RHI inquiry about transformation of the culture in the Civil Service. Many years later, we are still talking about transforming the culture of the Civil Service.

You mentioned Integr8 lots of times. I have a nervousness about IT systems, their delivery and whether they will work. What is plan B?

Dr Brady: I —.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): You may not have the whole time to [Inaudible.] [Laughter.]

Dr Aiken: You have talked about dashboards. You have used quite a lot of integrated management speak. You have talked about the importance of IT systems. You have talked about the transformational effects that Integr8 will have. You have talked about how it will transform the Civil Service. However, every IT system that we have had has, in some way or another, failed.

Dr Brady: My background is major digital systems. It is huge: from a procurement perspective, it is hundreds of millions of pounds for the process that will deliver it. Integr8 involves a substantive cross-cutting programme team. The requisite skills are there. The SRO has gone through MPLA training. We have now put in further resource to lead parallels from the digital aspects. I am now to appoint a chief digital officer, who will have key in-service leadership. We undertook a digital maturity assessment of the Civil Service, and it showed that we were at a very low-maturity element. I guess one of my concerns is —.

Dr Aiken: Sorry: we are at a low-maturity element with this?

Dr Brady: A low maturity in overall digital skills knowledge within the Civil Service —

Dr Aiken: OK.

Dr Brady: — not in relation to Integr8. There is a need to create core digital-competent skills within the Civil Service. Part of the people strategy is about delivering those digital skills and creating digital expertise. The project, obviously, will have the normal checks and balances, but, as it is a major capital project, we need to be over all those contingencies. I met the Integr8 team, and I know that the Committee visited them as part of this process. I am having substantive engagement. As with any major IT project, there will need to be checks and governance structures.

Dr Aiken: Are we green, orange or red on that at the moment?

Ms Minne: I am not sure, but, to add to what Jayne said, we have the advantage of having colleagues in UKG who have gone through similar to us and used the same system.

Dr Aiken: Yes. That is what I am worried about.

Ms Minne: Well —.

We are reaching out to them and asking them to be clear about what worked, what did not work and what the pitfalls are. I am talking from a HR perspective. Line managers will be able to self-serve, but there is also management information. Our management information will get better, but that does not mean that we do not have management information; it does exist. There is a management information team. In my team, there are people who are very capable and produce all the really good stuff that Catherine's team produces. It is there. We have official statistics, obviously. The thing is to learn from and make connections with others, including UKG colleagues.

Dr Aiken: My apologies, Chair. I have taken up too much time.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): That is OK.

Mr Carroll: Jayne, I think you said that one of your roles is secretary to the Executive. How do you think the Executive are performing?

Dr Brady: I am here representing Ministers in my role as head of the Civil Service. It has been my privilege to be part of the Civil Service. We have just talked about the challenges of my role in leading the overall approach for Ministers. I do not underestimate the challenges of a multi-party coalition. I admire all Members of the Assembly for stepping forward to lead on that. This is the first time that a Programme for Government has been delivered since 2009. Notwithstanding the fiscal challenges, delivery on it will be critical. I have very positive engagement with all Ministers. It is not for me to comment on the performance of the institutions that I work for, but I can say that it is a privilege to work within and for them.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Gerry, just to butt in: there are lots of important questions to ask of civil servants, but there is a limit to how much civil servants are able to comment on the performance of politicians. We have to be mindful of that.

Mr Carroll: There has been a lot of focus in the Chamber on the gender and sexual identity of some members of the Civil Service. There is an obsession with people who are trans or non-gender conforming. That has a big impact; some parties are obsessed with it. I asked the Finance Minister about that last year. He was concerned about the effect that it could have on civil servants. He did not have any data on how many people might have come forward regarding bullying or harassment because of that toxic environment being created. Would you like to make any general points on that, Jayne?

Dr Brady: As a general point, I commend our staff networks. They are important engagement tools for delivering the people strategy. They are also an important strategic lever because they represent all of Northern Ireland and are important in developing our strategy. I take responsibility for and support engaging with those networks. That engagement is important, because they make sure that it is an inclusive workforce to be engaged with, to be part of and to represent. There are many different networks. There is the LGBTQ network, but there is also the race equality network, the cancer network and the women's network, and I engage with them all. We had our international staff network celebration, last week. I have no information on the stats that you referred to, Gerry. That would be a matter for the Finance Minister.

Ms Minne: We have a policy, if anybody is suffering or feels that they are being subjected to any form of harassment, bullying or dignity at work issues. That policy has just been updated and agreed with the trade unions. We work very closely with the trade unions on all our policies and have informal discussions with them on issues that come up on a day-to-day basis and on any issues that might be bubbling. A part of the people survey talks about forms of harassment or bullying or being subject to anything discriminatory. The numbers are very small, but we have to take them very seriously.

Mr Carroll: I appreciate that. My point was more about the general political culture. I know that you may not comment on that, but, if it is coming through to us that there is a trend of staff feeling under pressure because of the political environment, it would be up to the Committee to hear about it.

Ms Minne: If anything like that, on any issue, comes through, it comes through the LGBTQ+ network or the trade unions. We have a very good, open communication line there.

Mr Carroll: That is good. I can feed that back if people are comfortable.

Over the years, I have stood on several picket lines with NIPSA members from the Civil Service. They have regularly told me that a lot of lower-grade staff are having to work second jobs at the weekends and in the evenings. I am concerned about that. They have also said that, alongside that, there has been an increase in the higher-level wages in the Civil Service. Following on from Diane's question, do you have a figure or percentage on the number of senior management in the Civil Service who are on over £100,000?

Dr Brady: I do not have that figure.

Ms Minne: I have a figure, and I can follow up in writing. It shows that the SCS median figure is lower than the UKG overall figure. It also shows how pay here compares, from entry level up through. We can get some figures on that for you. The pay award applies to everybody: there is no differential. The living wage is different. The Civil Service has a commitment around being a real living wage employer. If our grades at the bottom ever fall below that, that is uplifted. We have committed to doing that for some time. That may be how people feel, Gerry, but I do not think that the evidence is there to support it.

Mr Carroll: The living wage is definitely a thing for civil servants.

Ms Minne: Absolutely.

Mr Carroll: I would appreciate getting the figures on the numbers of staff earning over £100,000 and the percentage increase over the past number of years. That would be useful.

I have another question for Jayne. I have had a lot of communication around extreme weather policy from public-sector workers, not just from civil servants but from right across the board. I have asked some Assembly questions about that. There is a concern that, if there is extreme weather, it is sometimes left to a specific school, workplace or whatever to make a decision. There needs to be clear communication, and, when the weather hits a certain warning, there should be an automatic shutdown system. Do you or your direct team have any involvement in drafting that? Do you have an input to any of that?

Dr Brady: That is part of the civil contingencies framework. Depending on how that is delivered, there will be protocols. Tactical coordination groups will be mostly established under life and limb, which will be a PSNI-led initiative. First, protocols and directions are made: that is at an official level. Decisions regarding schools are a matter for the Department, working with the schools to inform their policy. Obviously, that is in an overall aspect. Whilst there is engagement, we do not define the policy from how the ALBs will take that. Many of those decisions are taken at a local level. I can get back to you and give you further information, Gerry.

Mr Carroll: Yes, that would be useful. I am told that each Department has its own procedure, and I understand that, but, if you play a somewhat central role in it, it would be useful to know that.

There has been a lot of general commentary about the public sector. It is 25 years in the making, if not longer. It is about the public sector being too big, and the narrative is that, therefore, we have to reduce staff numbers and, somehow, magically, jobs will appear. I do not believe for a second that the public sector is too big. There is a case for extending it in the health service, education and elsewhere. Do you want to comment on that narrative and the calls to reduce or scale back the public sector? Do you have any view or take on it?

Dr Brady: I do not have a view as regards bigger versus smaller: delivering what Ministers want and what the service needs is my starting point. I guess that there is some narrative regarding large expansions of the Civil Service. The Northern Ireland Civil Service has not grown. Over the past number of years, it has grown by around 3,000, but those were figures that were provided fully funded by DWP, because DFC had delivered such a strong perspective. Those are well-paid jobs being brought in for that aspect.

There are the stats and, of course, the benchmarking that the Treasury looked at, which was not evaluating a like-for-like perspective. That is a really important aspect: there are many different aspects that need to be compared. In the UK model, they took out the areas that were retained, such as defence, but did not put in the areas that are devolved to local government, such as social care, and there were other aspects as well. The like-for-like provision was not there.

Ultimately, as you look towards a service, the question is, "How do we need to be staffed?". We need a workforce model and a strategic workforce plan that delivers in a cost-effective area. New technologies and solutions are coming on board that should be able to allow individuals to contribute in different ways, with different innovations. The focus of the people strategy is very much about getting the correct strategic workforce plan and the affordability criteria. The affordability aspect is really important too.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Are you happy with that, Gerry, or do you want to ask further questions?

Mr Carroll: I have a few other questions, but I probably will not be able to get them in. That is OK.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): If you have one or two more questions, that is fine. I am just trying to make sure that I get everybody in.

Mr Carroll: Am I OK to ask another question?

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Go ahead. We have to be mindful that we cannot expect civil servants to answer on policy; otherwise, that is fair enough.

Mr Carroll: Recruitment was touched on earlier. I noted your comments to the Chair, but I do not think that a date was given for stopping the focus on agency staff. There has been a lot of communication to me and, I am sure, other MLAs about how long it takes for somebody to get from having an interview to getting a post in the Civil Service. It takes almost a year in many cases. There is frustration amongst civil servants that there is an automatic focus on external recruitment, which is long and costly, and there is limited career progression for people in the Civil Service. I have asked a couple of questions there, but there is a lot of anger and frustration about the whole process.

Dr Brady: Catherine covered the time taken to fill the posts earlier, when she spoke about the pilots run in the four high-volume competitions. The time has been reduced to 10 to 12 weeks for some entry-level competitions.

Ms Shannon: We ran an AO competition recently, and we ran a Belfast competition for vehicle examiners and industrials. We were able to turn those competitions around within a 12-week period; 12 weeks from advertising to bringing people in for interview. There is a difficulty with the time taken to fill some posts. If we do that quickly, we can allocate posts within a day or two. However, the vehicle examiners, for example, are brought in for a technical test. The length of time taken depends on the nature of the post.

You are absolutely right, however, about time to fill. We have frustrations about that, which is why we have looked at a different provider and a different model. Through that approach, we have shown that we can do things much more quickly. You are right; the previous AO competition took a year and more, but we turned the same competition around in 12 weeks as opposed to 12 months. We are now scaling that up and working our way towards it. From next year, we will be bringing recruitment back in-house and have it fully managed end-to-end by NICS HR. That gives us a further opportunity to alleviate those frustrations and drive our improvement forward by way of time to fill, time to hire and time to get people into posts in a really quick way.

Mr Carroll: It is good to get a bit more detail on that. That sounds positive; thank you for your answers.

Miss Hargey: It is important to note that our political architecture is nuanced, as is the Civil Service in terms of accountability and oversight, given what you do and do not have control over. I welcome the steps that you have outlined, Jayne, around greater accountability and building a sense of a united team that is working towards a vision. It will be good to see more of the outworking of that as we move forward.

You mentioned an evidence base in relation to filling vacancies. I want to ask you about the leadership position and building a different culture in the service. Have you identified any skills gaps, and how do you future-proof that going forward, as society changes? How will you use the opportunity presented by natural turnover in the Civil Service? You are right that it should not be about the Civil Service versus other sectors. It is about trying to find the right people for the jobs and looking at progression, internally and externally. Have you identified what those gaps could potentially be? Have you looked at that over a longer-term trajectory, given that we are going to have an ageing population, which will throw up a multitude of challenges? Have you considered global shocks? We are getting global shocks every couple of years now. It is about how we can manage the impact that those have here.

The Civil Service board is a part of all of it. I commend the fact that we are opening that up to people who are not in the Civil Service; that is a good thing. I want to hear your views on the three independent members and the culture changes that, you think, they have brought. Are there gaps there? I am thinking of the third sector, for example, and not just always going to the private sector, in order to have a rounded view of how we can improve output in the Civil Service. Is there more that the board can do to drive change?

I also want to ask about silo working. When you did the press release for the three independent members, you talked about working across organisational boundaries. Do you have any examples of that? Are you beginning to see change there? What more needs to be done, and what skills are needed in the organisation in order to meet some of those challenges?

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): There are a couple of things there. One is about the non-executive directors (NEDs). What are you doing around the effectiveness of that, including having more third-sector people? That is a critical one. The other one, Deirdre, is about having the right skills to deal with global shocks, because there are so many of them.

Miss Hargey: Yes. You mentioned that you are recruiting someone to look at IT and transformation, but are there other areas that we need to pay attention to going forward?

Dr Brady: Global shocks, skills and the structures. OK.

I will start with skills provision. It is really important: the qualification of the strategic workforce and job families and professions. We have identified, I think, 40 professions overall. Previously, there were 23 in that overall skill set. The job families were a massive piece of work. They provide not just a definition of what those roles need but a career pathway through the organisation. Jill might talk to a couple of those points.

There are also the areas of the success profile. We are moving away from a competency-based framework, which involves performance dimensions, towards something that looks at the specific skills that are required as part of that.

One of the key aspects of that has been some of the work, with which you might have engaged, by our CSTA in establishing the Northern Ireland Science and Technology Advisory Network across that community of interest. We have a substantial number of scientists and technologists, but there was no community of interest. That work is also about identifying areas of interest for science and technology research. There was a showcase upstairs in the Building of some departmental areas of research interest and their collaborative working.

Associated with that is the local government AI network, which has been established to see where the opportunities are. From a government perspective, positive trust has to be the first aspect of that, especially concerning the use of AI and the governance of that really important data. That will create a framework for joint collaboration and progression for roles with those skill sets. Appointing a chief digital officer will be a really important aspect of delivering some of those aspects across the Civil Service.

Of course, we have other professions, such as the legal profession, and many different areas, including procurement aspects.

I will ask Jill to speak about the job families, and I will come back in on the other points.

Ms Minne: That is the whole point of the guidance on strategic workforce planning. It is not just about numbers and number crunching. It is about genuinely asking Departments to think in different ways and about different skills and skills that might be missing. It is about planning for the skills. We have already designed a workforce model that is made up of largely professional, technical or general service. We now have job families and professions, and they set out what each role is. Alongside Integr8, our next big piece of work will look at a whole skills taxonomy, which will ask what the skill sets are for each role and how we can map them across.

It is also about how we recruit. The success profile has changed. It is not that we are completely dropping competencies, but it is about looking at it much more in the round. It is about experience, skills, behaviours and potential, not just the specialist skills. There are also ways of buying in professional skills that the Civil Service might not have a large cadre of. You can identify the specialist skill set that you might need, and that might be achieved through secondment. In addition to that, there are some areas in which we have not been able to recruit very easily because of the market rate, quite frankly. A recruitment and retention allowance policy has been agreed, which can put that in place if there is a very robust business case with evidence to show that we cannot recruit that particular skill or professional because of the salary. There is then a process for that.

Turning to the skill sets that are missing, the NIAO report highlighted project management and people management. NICS HR did a learning needs analysis and upped the ante on the provision of training in-house and different ways of training. It does not always have to mean sending someone on an expensive training course. All sorts of things can be done. It is about taking a whole-package approach to it.

Dr Brady: On addressing resilience and global shocks, there is increasingly crisis management. There have been three or four such events during my tenure: the pandemic, the Ukraine energy crisis and a further energy crisis, as well as the overall global aspects. It also involves looking at where we are from a data and evidence position. One of the senior leadership team's areas of focus is demographics: not just where we are now, but looking forward. For the first time, entry into our primary schools has declined, and our population is ageing. We are looking, through our lens of being the senior policy advisers to the overall Executive, at how to provide information to inform policy and make sure that that is built into those aspects. A strategic asset management unit was established, and that has mapped all the public-sector land across Northern Ireland. That is a significant volume of land. How can that be used in a more strategic and informed way from our overall evidence base? NISRA is also looking at the implications of the transformation forums and being joined-up. It is looking not just back but forward at the population level and how we can test those aspects. That is a key area, particularly as we look to informing an incoming Executive and providing them with the best information.

On resiliency, the civil contingencies framework is well established. We have protocols for dealing with a crisis and the preparedness to respond and prepare. However, given the increased aspect in the Middle East, Ministers have asked me to look towards the strategic policy group, which looks beyond the immediacy of dealing with that to the broader implications that it has for Northern Ireland, including the impacts on the most vulnerable, and the policy interceptions that we might need to put in for the most vulnerable, as well as at the impact on public-sector pay, the impact on the rural community, 80% of whom are reliant on home heating oil, and, indeed, the impact on workers, including on the input of domiciliary care workers. It is about looking at not just responding to the crisis but being more proactive. One of the key aspects when Ministers met at the North/South Ministerial Council was looking towards energy security and how we build more of that into those aspects, as well as looking at the security of the supply chain and the impacts on our farmers and communities as we build towards that. Making sure that our policy responses consider the demographical change and those broader resiliency aspects will be key.

The non-executives were appointed three years ago. We did not have an Executive at that time, so, as part of the recommendations, I went out to look for the specific skill sets that were identified in the Audit Office and PAC reports. Those were the major capital projects, the people strategy, transformation and public policy. Those individuals were recruited looking through the lens of those recommendations. The non-executive appointments are coming towards the conclusion of their tenure. We had an external board evaluation exercise that has looked at what the board needs to be for the next —.

Dr Aiken: May I interject? Who did that exercise?

Dr Brady: I have just forgotten the name of the organisation.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): It would be useful for us to see that. Go ahead in answering Deirdre Hargey's question.

Dr Brady: That was provided, and it has been built into a reset of our NICS board's terms of reference. It was re-established, and we are working through the actions to deliver that.

We are about to look at the reset and what skills we need to have for the next part of the NICS board journey. I have established a reference panel that includes some members of the community and voluntary sector. I look towards engaging with that sector, from an official perspective. We have quarterly meetings with all our trade union colleagues in order to inform them outside the standard formal structures, making sure that they are engaged. We will come back to you with perspectives on the next phase of the NICS board and the recruitment of the non-execs. I take on board your points about having a broader sector.

Miss Hargey: That would be good. Information on the reference panel and who is involved in that would also be good. Inequality is a driving theme in poor outcomes and the cost of delivering interventions, whether that is in Health, Education, Communities or Economy, in terms of productivity. We need to look at that area, particularly given the demographic shift that you talked about, global events and wealth inequality. We need to look at that more strategic level. I am keen for you to keep engaging with the Committee on that.

The other point goes back to what Gerry said about the impact on workers and how they are treated, particularly those on the lower pay scales. Hybrid working is one element, but improved terms and conditions is another. Obviously, there are a lot of women in some of those low-paid jobs, and the work is often precarious. That has an impact on societal issues. How will the people strategy pick up on those issues, as well as address community balance, working-class communities or minority ethnic communities and the equality work that needs to be done? It may not be for today, but I am keen to get more information on what we are trying to do in those areas and on the progression within the lower pay levels. That would be useful.

Dr Brady: There was broad engagement with those groups in the development of the people strategy, which Jill led, and it was co-designed with them. All those sectors are represented, particularly the trade unions, which came out as part of it. Business groups and community and voluntary groups were also involved and ensured that we delivered. It is a work in progress. Whilst we have targets, and need to deliver on the recommendations, we will need to feed things into the people strategy as circumstances change and areas appear. There will need to be flexibility.

Ms Minne: Equality runs through everything. There was a conscious decision not to have a separate bit, although there is something about inclusive leadership. It was about saying, "If you don't run this through absolutely everything that you're doing — if you don't apply that equality lens to everything in the strategy — it will fail". I am happy to provide details on that, Deirdre. That is not a problem.

Miss Hargey: Thank you.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): I have a couple of final things before we let you go. First, Jayne, it is important to ask and be direct. Steve said that you have been in post since September 2021. There is a general sense that we have not made progress since September 2021. You also mentioned accountability and your accountability. You could caveat it: you could say that it is not compromised in a proprietary sense but compromised in the sense that you are not directly responsible to an accounting officer. Who does your appraisal? Do you have a formal appraisal process?

Dr Brady: It has been discussed before in this forum that there is no formal appraisal process. I am under the SCS performance management system. That has been the position since, I think, 1999. There has never been a formal performance management process for the head of the Civil Service.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Do you think that there should be?

Dr Brady: I absolutely think that there should be. In fact, when the Executive were restored and I was changing the performance management approach for my permanent secretaries, I identified the gap — I am not sure whether my predecessors had — and asked people in organisational development (OD) to assess what was delivered in other regions. I crystallised the issues.

Dr Aiken: The Cabinet Secretary does it.

Dr Brady: The Cabinet Secretary does it, but we are a separate organisation. The Cabinet Secretary has never provided it for the devolved Administrations. I absolutely would support that. It is not for me to define it, but to say that I am not engaged or held to account —. I engage substantively —

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): You are here now. We appreciate that.

Dr Brady: — and I deal with Ministers. I wholly support a formal process; in fact, I am the one who raised the point.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): There has been some conversation about your pay award. We in this room are used to having people talk about our pay awards. We are mature adults. We can talk about ours, and we have to talk about yours, because you are a senior official. I think that it is on the record that you are paid more than a UK Cabinet Secretary. I am not saying that that is right or wrong, but do you think that future appraisals and, potentially, pay awards, should be linked to the delivery of some of the metrics? Sometimes, we have not nailed down specific metrics, be they reducing vacancies or improving sickness absences, but do you think that some of the awards should be linked to delivery on specific metrics?

Dr Brady: I would fully accept whatever approach was defined by the responsible area. It would be absolutely acceptable to be held to account and to have metrics, so long as you have the vires to deliver them. I applied for this job. I am in a privileged position to have the job. I appreciate the quantum, particularly in light of the current cost of living.

I took the job on the basis of the salary that was advertised. I took the lowest base for that, and I have proceeded through the increment base. I have had no input either way, so I would fully accept whatever perspective needs to be provided. I would identify, not for myself, specialist roles perhaps in areas where you need to apply for a market rate —

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Absolutely. I agree with you on that.

Dr Brady: — but I fully agree that I should be held accountable with key performance indicators.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): You mentioned vires. That brings us back to the anomalous position around the constitutional point that you raised. You do not want to make a recommendation on that, but you would certainly acknowledge that that is a challenge. It is literally a challenge for you in having the levers to direct and deliver major Civil Service reform when you are only partly responsible or perhaps not particularly directly responsible. Is that something that we could look at to improve with regard to making you or A N Other holder of the role directly responsible? It is not about you personally.

Dr Brady: It is not my position to suggest constitutional change. However, I accept that while I am not, de facto, the accounting officer, I accept the responsibility of delivering the closure of temporary promotions to all permanent secretaries. You say that I do not have accountability. I fully understand that that is what I need to do, and I am focusing my time and effort on making sure that we deliver.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): We appreciate that. We intend to use some of those metrics to hold you, and the broader team, accountable for good constructive reasons.

I want to ask about another aspect of your role as head of the Civil Service: Civil Service impartiality. How often have you pushed back against Ministers in relation to questions of Civil Service impartiality? I appreciate that, for obvious reasons, you might not want to give specific examples, but you could anonymise any examples. Have you ever said to a Minister, or intervened with a permanent secretary, to say, "I don't think that that should have happened" or "I think that there's a proprietary issue here in the impartiality of the Civil Service"?

Dr Brady: I consider the impartiality of the Civil Service hugely important, as, I believe, do all Ministers and Members of the Assembly, because we have a multi-party Government delivering for the people, and speaking truth to that is a core part of my role. That is what I do. However, I do not think that it would be appropriate for me to give examples — and that is on all sides of the domain.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Have you done that?

Dr Brady: I have.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Yes. You can anonymise the example but give us the broad scenario in which that happened.

Dr Brady: Suffice it to say that that is part of my role. I have been clear regarding where the boundaries of Civil Service impartiality are, and where, rightly, Ministers should have responsibility. I guess that that tension keeps everyone in the correct place, and I take it very seriously. I cannot give any examples because that would lead to —.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Of course, I did not ask you to name Ministers or Departments. That would be difficult. I have a couple of examples of when I engaged with your office, and I understand the challenges. One was the Education Minister's visit to the Occupied Territories, which, clearly, official resources were used to publicise. Another was the publication of the June monitoring round two or three days before the UK general election. To my eyes, as a former civil servant, both were flagrant breaches of Civil Service impartiality, yet nothing was done.

I am giving a personal view. However, what happens if civil servants see that happening yet do not see the leader of the Civil Service say, "There's a challenge here". I appreciate that, in those examples, you have given your view to me, but do you accept that individual civil servants will sometimes look to leadership to stand up for Civil Service impartiality?

Dr Brady: I assure you, Chair, that I do stand up for Civil Service impartiality. However, I will not go into specific examples because my role is to manage the Civil Service impartially, and commenting on those would force me to be partial. I assure you, however, that I take impartiality very seriously. It is core to the running of the Civil Service and to having the trust of Ministers and the Executive.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): I would appreciate even an anonymised general example of when it happened. However, I will bring in the Deputy Chair now.

Ms Forsythe: I have two points. The first is about feedback coming through about the block Senior Civil Service in Northern Ireland and the main Civil Service operating separately. That breeds cultural problems of them and us, the chiefs top heavy and a lack of integration rather than a prioritisation of front-line staff. Those themes come through. In some of the best places where I worked, in one case in manufacturing, the managing directors walked around the factory floor every day. There was a really integrated approach between management and front-line staff. Are there any steps to have more of such integration? Do you recognise that as a cultural issue that needs to be addressed in the Civil Service?

Dr Brady: I agree that hierarchical structures in which that is how people are perceived do not provide the inclusive environment that is core to the people strategy. All the permanent secretaries and our non-execs were in Maghaberry prison yesterday for a tour with Prison Service colleagues from across that service, and we walked the hallways with them. That is an example of a critical aspect that is important not only for visible leadership but in understanding the work of the front-line service. It is often our front-line workers who know all the issues, because they deal with them. I have been to the job market in Lisburn to speak about universal credit; I have been to many of our schools across the Province and have seen the provision for special educational needs and the impact of those services; and I have been to our courts to see the special provisions for remote evidence. That is critical.

The structures in Clare House — there is no office for the perm secs; they are in an open-plan area — encourage that way of working in the domain.

Ms Minne: I will speak frankly. In developing the people strategy, we openly engaged and consulted on the issue, discussing it with a cross-section of staff and an independent panel. During that engagement, an approach was agreed with the trade unions and everybody else on the fact that there is an SCS cadre but that it is about the ability to be better leaders. The people strategy calls that out to a degree. That cadre of staff is called "the SCS", but it is about providing visible, value-based, collective leadership; it is not about saying that they are special.

I think that there is a grade hierarchy, but that will break down with the move into job families. At the minute, we recruit by grade, and we talk about "grade 5" or whatever, instead of the role, but that will change when we have the new workforce model. There was very good engagement with a cross-section of people on the people strategy, and the issue was never raised except insofar as people said, "We would like our leaders to be really good, visible leaders". There are specific questions on that in the people survey; we will see the answers to those in the next set of results.

Ms Forsythe: That is really good to hear. In doing the inquiry, we want to get to the core of the issues that people bring to us and to make meaningful recommendations and work with you. People think that we are here just to scrutinise and criticise, but we want to work with you to make improvements.

My other point is about sick leave. We have talked to Catherine and Jill about that, but, Jayne, when we have you here, I will ask you about it. We touched on the huge cost — £48·8 million last year. In-year figures have not been published, so we are waiting to see what the cost is this year, but we all expect there to have been an increase. It is about Civil Service ownership of it. I previously made the point that the HR function sits in the Department of Finance, which says that it is up to Departments to provide line management on the issue, but when you ask a Department what is going on, it will say that that is managed by the Department of Finance.

For you, as the head of the Civil Service, the number is big. As a performance indicator, it is not a good look — when it hits the press, it is not a good news story — and we do not want to see it in this place. In your leadership role, can you say, "This is something that we need to address; let us all get to grips with it"? It might be targets or just making sure that individuals take ownership of the issue.

I asked Catherine and Jill about it, so I know that it is a work in progress. However, it does not feature a lot in the specifics of the report on year 1 of the people strategy. It is a big number that is getting bigger; those are the circumstances that we are in. As the head of the Civil Service, what are your thoughts on it?

Dr Brady: I agree. The cost is, I think, £48 million. Never mind the value for money aspect; in the current fiscal situation, notwithstanding that people experience life events and that there is sickness —.Catherine talked about the figures. The figures are declining. We have the official stats of the 13·8 days to 13·4 days and the unofficial stats that have not gone through the NISRA machine. There is some incremental improvement. Some of the fundamentals are in place. There will be evaluation through my meetings with the perm secs regarding sickness levels in their Departments and what they are doing about them.

My view on the consideration of the dashboards that we are producing is that there will be a number of key metrics, such as time to fill and sickness levels. Once we have the fundamentals in place, which we do, and are showing the incremental improvement and aiming to address the hotspots, we should set targets. Notwithstanding the fact that some areas such as, perhaps, prisons will always have a difficulty in the area of sickness, we should absolutely tackle a few very focused things for which we, as a leadership team, will be held collectively to account and for which we will hold each other to account. That management information is part of the work on which Catherine has been leading.

Ms Shannon: As Jayne said, it is a small decrease, but, over the previous two years of NISRA's reporting and the subsequent two years of our own management information, however — I say this with a huge health warning regarding its robustness — we are seeing a steady decrease in absence. I will be happy to share with the Committee the work that we have done with NISRA to properly drill down into our absence figures and how we compare with other organisations.

In some of those initial findings, we can look at any particular Department and see, for example, that males over the age of 55 at a particular grade are driving down the absence figures for the whole Department. That means that we can ask what we need to do for that particular cohort of staff to drive that down. It is about having robust intelligence whereby we can say, "Well, actually, the expectation should be that absence should be at that level. How do we drive that down?". We are really moving in that direction.

Ms Forsythe: As you say, it is about having meaningful information.

Dr Brady: It is not about just the £48 million, although, of course, that is critical; it gets people back to fulfilling lives and to servicing our people, intervening and supporting them. We have some really positive anecdotal feedback on the new services and the provision of those wrap-around areas that are being delivered.

Ms Shannon: That is even in the work that we have done on bereavement, starting to look at the demographic of our staff, including ages, and thinking about staff whose elderly parents have dementia. There are different lenses that we want to put on how we support our staff before they go off so that we get them back into work in a more supportive way as quickly as we can.

Ms Forsythe: Absolutely. I know that there are things such as miscarriage leave. There are a lot of sensitive issues that come into play here. Thanks very much. I appreciate that.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Steve Aiken wanted in. A very brief one, before we finish.

Dr Aiken: Yes, just a very quick one. Harry Truman had a famous saying: "The buck stops here". Under collective leadership, where does the buck stop?

Dr Brady: Here.

Dr Aiken: There? You are responsible? We will hold you to that. Well done.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): We may need to clarify some of the legal points around that and to give you the vires, as you said.

One final thing that the Committee was going to raise, for which we may need to go into closed session, was reporting on an individual who is at permanent secretary level and being paid. There are broader concerns, and it is important that we ask the questions, because, to put it bluntly, there is a sense that, in the Northern Ireland Civil Service, things keep going, culturally speaking, and that real reform does not happen. I think that you would acknowledge that that is the perception; you might dispute whether the perception is real, but there is a perception. Diane mentioned that real accountability does not happen in the Civil Service and that people are sometimes managed in fairly unusual ways.

We will go into closed session to discuss that, because we want to talk about an individual, but will you answer on the cultural point? We have not really changed the culture since RHI or the first NIAO report. Some of what we talk about in closed session might reflect that. People get the sense that the Civil Service culture has not fundamentally changed. In many ways, some of that comes from the unusual political structure. I mean no offence to you, Jayne, because you applied in good faith, but the job is vacant because, in a previous recruitment process, the two main parties effectively blackballed two appointable candidates. That is the truth that everyone knows. There is a sense that, culturally, things are not really changing. Do you agree with that?

Dr Brady: Culture change takes a long time. I guess that it is the essence of all change. I actually 100% agree, however, that the culture is changing.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): It is changing?

Dr Brady: The results of the people survey, from a low base, included indicators of that. There had been improvement in seven of the nine indicators, while one indicator stayed the same, and the remaining indicator declined by 1%. That was my work perspective. Anecdotally, those that were about poor performance, which has historically been poorly managed across the Civil Service, increased by 10 percentage points between the two surveys, which shows the difference in those aspects and the culture change.

Performance increased by 10 percentage points between those two surveys, showing the difference in the culture change. The evidence will become apparent as we roll these things out. We will be kept accountable for delivery and for the tone that we set at the top as well, at collective leadership level, and the responsibility that I take in the leadership. However, Chair, I agree that it is slow.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): It is slow, OK.

Dr Brady: However, I feel that it is changing.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): Is it slower than it should have been?

Dr Brady: An organisation of 24,000 or 25,000 takes time to change and to embed new processes. I do not hide behind the constitutional structures or whatever my vires may be. We are in the process of changing the organisation, but it does not happen in a single moment, with the single aspect and deliverable.

Jill, have you anything else on the people strategy?

Ms Minne: No, I was just going to make the point that one of the key questions in the people survey is that "Poor performance is dealt with effectively in my team." One agrees, disagrees or whatever with that. That is the key question. It has gone up by 10 percentage points. I take the point about perception, but we ask that question specifically.

The Chairperson (Mr O'Toole): That perception is abroad, so it is important that we ask robust questions and get robust answers. It is part of improving public confidence in all of us, politicians and civil servants, because it is really low at the minute. I do not ask this to get at people. I would rather talk about this in open session because I believe in transparency, but because of a specific request around this person who, we are told, is paid centrally by the Department of Finance, we will go into closed session to discuss it.

However, before we close, I thank you for coming to give evidence. There are specific things that I will round up when we go back into open session after this. We have agreed lots of things that you are going to give us and for which we will hold you to account. We appreciate that, and we hope that it is for the long-term good, in producing a robust report and improving performance generally.

Thank you very much for your evidence. We appreciate it. We will go into closed session.