Audit Scotland (Performance Audits 2009-2010)
I invite Caroline Gardner to speak to this item.
The programme of performance audits sits alongside the corporate plan, and is the next level down in detail, if you like, of the work that we will be doing over the next couple of years. The programme forms the basis of our performance audit work through to the end of 2010. Again, we consulted widely on a long list of studies from a range of sources that were identified by our staff. The series of performance audits that are outlined in the programme take account of views that were expressed by MSPs, Scottish Government officials, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives and Senior Managers and a range of other organisations and people with whom we work.
The studies that are included in the programme cover areas in which the Auditor General and the Accounts Commission feel examination is needed. The programme reflects current policy developments and focuses on areas of high public expenditure, areas in which major change is planned or under way and, in particular, on areas in which we think we can have the most impact for the people throughout Scotland who rely on and pay for public services.
The studies cover a range of issues, such as emergency care, efficient justice and physical recreation services in local government. Importantly, a number of the projects cut across more than one part of the Scottish public sector, which is one of the things that Audit Scotland is uniquely well placed to work on. Those include projects on delivering efficiencies, community planning, and community health partnerships. The programme takes account of work that is planned or being carried out by our partner scrutiny bodies. It is worth stressing that we routinely look for opportunities to work with them on areas of common interest, and to share information.
We know that we need to demonstrate the impact that we are having on public services. As the Auditor General said, we have identified four indicators of impact. We expect each of the studies to have an impact in at least one of those areas. They focus on improving effectiveness and quality; providing assurance or improving arrangements for accountability; improving economy and efficiency, which feels even more important now than it did when we started consulting back in the summer; and improving planning and management.
We are keen to demonstrate that public audit is making a real difference to public services, and the Accounts Commission and the Auditor General are committed to ensuring that all our work has the maximum impact, both in terms of helping public bodies to improve and in holding them to account. To do that, we aim to demonstrate our impact through efficiency savings and improved quality, and we hope that the programme has got the balance right between those two focuses.
As ever, we are happy to answer any questions from the committee either about the overall approach or about specific audits that we have included in the programme this time.
In your work on the report on the role of boards, will you be examining whether the current landscape is efficient and effective or whether better results could be achieved by having boards come together? The same question could apply to some of the work that the Accounts Commission is doing in respect of local government. There has been some discussion recently about whether the current management structures are the most effective and efficient way of delivering services in Scotland.
I will offer a general comment, on which Caroline Gardner will expand.
The work on boards will be of greater significance than we envisaged it would be, in view of some of the issues and concerns that have arisen, not least in this committee. It will provide a reliable and comprehensive picture of the range of board-type structures that we have in Scotland and how they are organised, operated and governed. We would not go so far as to recommend any changes—that is a matter of policy for Government—but I am confident that the Audit Scotland report will provide a comprehensive description of the range of arrangements that currently exists.
It is more likely that the study on community planning will consider how well bodies are working together at local level so that we can identify the key areas of priority for them and, moving on from that, what each can contribute to making improvements. It is unlikely that we will go so far as to make recommendations for structural change, but we will certainly look for opportunities to get more out of joint working.
That theme is also coming through strongly in the development work that we are doing for the next phase of the work on best value, in which we are deliberately strengthening the focus on partnership working to ensure that people are going past process in order that they can really make a difference in what they achieve.
Notwithstanding what you said about not making recommendations about structural change, will you identify examples of structures in local government and boards that are inefficient and weak and which inhibit effective delivery of services?
If we find clear examples of that, we will identify them. However, so far our focus on community planning and best value has tended to demonstrate that there are not many barriers, where people are working well together and are prepared actively to challenge what each contributes to a shared goal. Obviously, there is a wider policy question about what the right landscape is for public bodies across the piece, so our work might be a helpful contribution to that. However, it would be a step too far for us to make recommendations.
I look forward to seeing the results of your work. Thank you for attending.
That concludes the public part of our agenda.
Meeting continued in private until 12:23.