Benefits of going online

Research from PWC shows that middle income families will save up to £560 annually by going online, net of costs, while those on low incomes will save £240, which comes from savings made by paying by Direct Debit etc. Likelihood of getting a job goes up 25% and salary in work rises by 10% for those online. Children with access at home see a two grade increase at GCSE. People’s confidence increases and loneliness – crucial among the elderly population who remain disproportionately offline - is reduced. 

Race Online

Race Online 2012 is the cross-sector campaign launched by Martha Lane Fox to ‘inspire, encourage and support’ get people online. Its ambition is ‘to make the UK the first nation in the world where everyone can use the web.
Race Online receives minimal Government funding (and Martha Lane Fox herself waived the fee she was offered for her post) and uses its partners’ assets to get people online. The campaign has 1200 partners, ranging from the very small, to the very big such as Post Office, libraries network, UK Online centre network, Job Centre Plus and Mecca Bingo.

“Give an hour” is a recent example of Race Online’s work.  Led and promoted by the BBC, with editorial, talent and educational resources, this public-facing campaign sought to address the reason most people (64%) cite for not going online: lack of motivation. It encouraged the 40 million adults in the UK who have internet skills to to spend the hour they gained when the clocks went back in October inspiring and encouraging an offline friend, family member or neighbour to try the web for the first time. . Race Online has also brought out low-cost high quality refurbished PC and connectivity offers to remove cost as a barrier (a factor for 23% of offline population); launched a national network of ‘local digital champions’ who can offer support and encouragement locally and within organizations, and a blueprint for councils, ‘Go On places’. 

‘Digital by Default’

In tandem with Race Online 2012, Martha Lane Fox has been advising Government on its own use of digital. She conducted a review of DirectGov, the Government’s web estate, all of whose recommendations were accepted by Francis Maude, and which has resulted in the launch of the new Government Digital Service in December 2011. The organizing principle behind her recommendations to Government is ‘digital by default’ – i.e., justifying why something shouldn’t be done online, not why it should. At Google, employees are taught to think internet first. Online should be the primary option. There is some resonance from government for this approach; the challenge now is implementing it. Mike Bracken, founder of the Guardian ecosystem, is now heading up the

The principle is that the home page should be Google. Or, it should be as simple as Google to use. Websites should start with what people come to Government to look for, as opposed to telling them what they want.
Not only does this benefit government in terms of efficiency savings, and better, more responsive services, but it also benefits the people who are least likely to use the internet – those on pension and benefits - are most likely to use government services. Making Government websites easier to use makes it easier for everyone. Educating people to use the internet needs to be taken seriously. Government needs to take the lead and educate people; this skills is now as fundamental as learning to read.

Greater efficiency through digitalisation

Digital boards are an example of greater efficiency and effectiveness. Martha Lane Fox sits on the boards for M&S and Channel 4. At Marks and Spencer, big paper packs have now been exchanged for an iPad, which is delivered to board members before the meeting.

Roundtable discussion – key points included:

• Going digital versus government spend restrictions: caution was urged over massive spends – things can be designed much more cheaply.

• People who are in leadership positions may not be that knowledgeable, or at the cutting edge of digitalisation. Adaptability needs to be hard wired. A broader look at how government structures work is necessary – one solution is to have more young people on boards.

• The digital agenda was previously with local government. This has now shifted to central government. The Prime Minister is supportive, as well as Francis Maude and Iain Duncan Smith – Duncan Smith has referred to it as a ‘tool against poverty’.

• MLF is only tasked with looking at adults. However, she has been shocked by how few children have exposure to the internet at school. She is interested in using the digital skills of children to help adults.

• There is a big divide between those children that have access at home and those who don’t.

• The importance of the customer is something that is crucial and should be at the heart of digitalisation. 

• Lose/tight – what’s the right balance? User design should be tightly controlled.

• Having a digital impact assessment in every regulation is a good idea.

• Issue of IT in Government - new systems are needed and certain contracts need to be renegotiated to make digitalisation work.

• Is the political cycle of governments too short to make real change?

• International examples of digitally advanced and capable countries include Estonia, Lithuania, Singapore, South Korea, Canada and Australia.

Martha closed by encouraging all chairs to join her in the championing role in their organisations and to commit to being Digital by default; i.e. for us all to play our part in leading the culture change that is needed.

• Good corporate governance
• Roles, responsibilities and relationships
• Standards of behaviour in public life
• Effective financial management and transparency

This guide is recommended reading for all Chairs and board members of public bodies. It pin points existing guidance and requirements for public body boards, building on them to provide a comprehensive and extensive guide for Chairs and board members of public bodies in England.

Chris Banks CBE, Chair of the PCF, said:

“The PCF is committed to improving the efficiency and effectiveness of public services by supporting Chairs of public bodies in their roles. This guide equips Chairs and board members with the information and advice that they will need to perform their role effectively.

“The development of the guide has been overseen by a steering group of PCF members, who have ensured that it adds value to all Chairs and Board members of public bodies, whatever their role and whatever their level of experience.

“A lot is written about good governance, but what we aimed to do here was produce a very practical guide for Chairs. And thanks to the steering group and CIPFA, that’s what we have done.”

Jon Graham, Managing Director of CIPFA, said:

“Current economic conditions make it a challenging time to sit on the board of a public body. These boards play a critical role in ensuring good governance and performance and it is essential that board members are equipped to rise to the task.

“This guide provides essential information for Chairs and board members to ensure that they make the most of their position and are as effective as possible.”

Board Governance Essentials is available for purchase from the CIPFA website and is free of charge for all members of the Public Chairs’ Forum.

NOTES TO EDITORS:

• Members of the PCF steering group are as follows:

Chris Banks CBE, Chair of the Public Chairs’ Forum
Sir Bert Massie, Former Chair of the Commission for the Compact
Robert Napier CBE, Chair of the Homes and Communities Agency and the Met Office
Ed Smith, Chair of the Student Loans Company
Jenny Watson, Chair of the Electoral Commission
Anne Watts CBE, Chair of the Appointments Commission

• For media enquiries please contact amy.noonan@publicchairsforum.org.uk on 0207 7470491

Public Bodies have received a great deal of attention under the Coalition government. Much of the government’s first year has focused on their reorganisation and reform. There has been less consideration of the more fundamental issue of the relationship between government departments and the arm’s length bodies they sponsor. Yet since most public bodies are continuing in some form, this remains really important – to the body, to the government and to the taxpayer. It has been consistently identified as a problem by Public Chairs’ Forum members.  And lack of clarity on roles and responsibilities of government and its ALBs, and relations ranging from micro-management to benign neglect, were highlights in the Insitute for Government’s report Read Before Burning.

A new project –  being done jointly between the Public Chairs’ Forum and the Institute for Government – is looking at how best to create effective relations between central government and ALBs. Looking at a range of arm’s-length bodies in terms of size, scope and subject, and across government departments, we are seeking to identify examples of ‘good practice’ and pitfalls to avoid. In conducting a series of interviews with public body chairs and chief executives, as well as Ministers, Permanent Secretaries and people running or working in sponsor teams, we aim to capture perspectives from multiple sides of the relationship and produce a practical guide. 

Consistently raised by all parties is the need for greater ‘strategic alignment’. In many cases, departments and arm’s length bodies share an understanding of operational functions, but are less in synch in their strategy and broader priorities. The effectiveness of relations looks to depend not only on meaningful framework agreements, but also on the quality of personal relations. As one sponsor comments, ‘people without structures are hopeless and structures without people are barren and cold’. The initial findings indicate there is no ‘best model’ for engagement. However, there is unanimous agreement so far on the importance of openness, frankness and an embedded ‘no surprises’ rule.

This project is still underway. We aim to report in March. We would appreciate your thoughts.

The National Audit Office (NAO) helps parliament hold Secretary of States to account for the efficiency and effectiveness of the economy. It reports on the value for money in departments and projects.

The NAO has 3 primary strategic themes, all of which are enabling in nature:

• mature financial management
• cost effective government
• informed government (appropriate use of information in government).

The NAO champions effective and appropriate financial management and increases quality.

The public sector is increasingly information driven; this needs to be understood and integrated into finance.

It is important to recognise that public audit is very different to private audit.

Transparency

- Transparency should be contextualised, standardised, timely, accurate and high quality.

- It is a powerful motivator (fear of embarrassment through exposure)

- Transparency takes on a lot of the same characteristics as management information. These two things should be approached in the same way. Information should be structured, detailed and maintained.

- People should produce the information that is needed to run organisations effectively –the cost benefit and value for money should always be a principle consideration.

- Achieving useful transparency is difficult and this needs to be acknowledged.

- Implementing transparency can create a fear of precedent. Information is power, and people can be fearful of letting go of this power.

Accountability

Both the NAO and Chairs of public bodies have an important role to play in improving accountability.

There is a risk that Departments operate on a compliance basis rather than questioning what they are doing these things for. NAO and Chairs have a key role to play in helping Departments to think in a different way.

Focus needs to be on the sponsoring unit within Departments. There is a tendency for the civil service to be pre-occupied with policy development, and not with running a business or achieving value for money.

Discussion focused on some key areas:

- Department boards and public body boards

- How to ensure Chairs are aware of private issues
The role of the Board:

- There is an issue of accounting officer versus board; it is difficult to find a coherent statement about what the board is about. What is the role of the board beyond advisory?

- There is often a desire for public boards to operate similarly to those within the private sector, but this needs to be reconciled with the role of the accounting officer.

- There is also a risk that boards become like stakeholder boards, without the necessary skills in place, which can result from a lack of understanding. A change in management skills is needed.

- Boards need people who are sharp commercially and who push value for money.

- The Audit Committee has a powerful role to play.

Risk management

Is risk management as good as it can be? The NAO has a campaign for a more intelligent approach to risk management. Audit and risk could be an area to develop in Amyas Morse’s role.

Outcome

The Public Chairs’ Forum and the NAO have overlapping agendas and it was agreed that both sides would look for ways to continue working together in the future. Anything that can be done to get people more engaged in this agenda is important.

More openness and transparency in Public Bodies (otherwise known as “quangos”) could help restore the public’s confidence in them, says The Public Chairs’ Forum (PCF).

The PCF, which is the member organisation for Chairs of public bodies, is launching a practical guide to help public chairs take the next step towards greater transparency. The guide, published jointly with the Institute for Government, paves the way for public bodies to take a leading role in increasing transparency in their organisations.

Transparency in Arm’s Length Bodies – A Guide to Best Practice encourages public bodies to publish not only data, but also information on the wider issues of what these organisations are there to do: how they are governed; how they make decisions; how well they perform and how to access or complain about their activities. It identifies the key components of “useful” transparency in public bodies and puts the needs of citizens and customers at its heart. Research undertaken for the report suggests that casting light on these issues will be important to improving overall public confidence in public bodies.

The guide is the result of an extensive series of interviews and meetings with senior officials in public bodies, public chairs, government departments, oversight and citizen advisory groups, academia, the private sector and not-for-profit sector, and the Cabinet Office.
Key Principles

The guide suggests that information presented by Arms Length Bodies(ALBs) should be:

  * readily accessible and useable
  * relevant to the needs of different audiences
  * timely
  * put in context and explained and
  * proportionate

The guide also features practical tips on how ALB websites should be organised, and offers advice on improving overall transparency. To make things simple for users, it recommends that all public bodies organise the information they provide under four headings:

  * Customers and citizens - the services we offer, how to get involved and how to give feedback
  * Performance - how we are doing
  * Governance - how we are run and how we make decisions
  * Data - the data we hold

The guide also gives additional measures that public bodies requiring the highest degree of openness can consider.

Chris Banks, Chair of the Public Chairs’ Forum, says:

Public Bodies are responsible for spending large amounts of tax payers’ money and it is important that the general public understands how this money is spent. We hope that the guide’s response to this will help to increase public confidence in public bodies.

  By setting these guidelines, we are responding to the Government’s request to be more open, but in addition to publishing data, our guide encourages public bodies to respond to other questions that the general public may have – Who are these bodies? What do they do? And how good are they at doing it? Holding a shining light on the operations of ALBs may be uncomfortable in the short term, but it will bring benefit to everyone in the long term, by showing exactly where these organisations are adding value

Speaking about the guide, Lord Adonis, Director of the Institute for Government, said:

  Arm’s length bodies are characterised as unaccountable and inefficient. Too often it is hard for people to find out key information – like how they are funded, who they account to, how they make decisions and how their performance compares with similar bodies. Our report, “Read Before Burning”, recommended that ALBs take a lead by making information on the way they operate easily accessible. This guide sets out how they can do that. The greatest value will come if information is put in context and produced on a comparable basis by like bodies. We, together with the Public Chairs’ Forum, are keen to encourage all public bodies to take the steps set out in the guide

Andrew Summers is chair of Companies House, which will be the first public body to pilot the guide. A member of the PCF, he also belongs to the working group that has overseen its development. Speaking about the guide, he said:

Companies House is delighted to be the one of the first public bodies to pilot the recommendations of this transparency guide. We are a very customer-centric organisation and implementing this guide gives us the opportunity to be at the leading edge of transparency best practice for the benefit of our customers, our stakeholders and all citizens.

ENDS

NOTES TO EDITORS:

1. Transparency in Public Bodies – A Guide to Best Practice builds on a number of recent developments:

  * the Institute for Government’s report ‘Read Before Burning’ which recommended ALBs to publish information on their status and operations in a standardised format online, in turn improving the transparency of their organisations
  * the Public Chairs’ Forum’s desire for ALBs to be at the cutting edge of transparency best practice and
  * the Government’s ambitious transparency agenda, with a commitment to extend transparency to “every area of public life”.

2. The guide complies with and builds on the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) detailed guidance on the type of information that it expects non-departmental public bodies (NDPBs) to provide in order to meet their Freedom of Information commitments and the Cabinet Office Principles of Good Corporate Governance in Executive NDPBs, released in June 2011 which makes an “explicit commitment to openness in all activities”

3. For media enquiries contact amy.noonan@publicchairsforum.org.uk on 0207 7470491

You can read it here.

Since the last meeting in March, new departmental governance arrangements have been established with 54 independent directors appointed and 14 lead directors in place. With structures agreed, focus can now turn to building effective ALB and Departmental Non-Executive relationships. Chairs were encouraged to take a leading role by initiating contact with Departmental Non-Executives if they were not already in touch.

So what does a good relationship look like? Everyone agreed that the relationship between Departmental Non-Executives and Public Body Chairs and Boards should be balanced and non-managerial. And of course it is important that a relationship is established in the first place. A lack of knowledge, communication and awareness of each other are some of the key things that hold good relationships back from developing. Lord Browne encouraged ALB and Departmental Non-Executives to work towards a relationship that is consistent, sustainable and longterm. Ensuring a high level of trust and strategic alignment, with a quantitative underpinning to activities will be important in achieving this.

A roundtable discussion, with Departmental and Public Body Non-Executives and Permanent Secretaries has been set up to take place during the summer to further define these relationships and agree a joint forward programme. PCF Chair Chris Banks will be representing the Public Chairs’ Forum at the meeting.

Given that Chairs of public bodies hold public appointments themselves and are regularly involved in the appointments of others, they are a key audience for the review. The latest PCF seminar was therefore an opportune moment for Sir David to speak to PCF members in advance of the publication of his formal consultation paper later this month.

The paper will outline some proposals for change on which there will be a period of formal consultation, before a new code of practice for the regulation of public appointments is published later in the year. Simplification, better regulation, and a more principles-based approach are some of the main ambitions underpinning the review.

Whilst not as prevalent as in times gone by, age old issues such as patronage and cronyism still have the potential to reappear should the right safeguards not be in place. The Commissioner can play a significant part in reducing this risk by ensuring a wider choice of candidates with increased diversity.

Other issues touched on at the meeting included the pros and cons of pre-appointment hearings – what impact will these have on the overall appointments process?

Encouraging people from a wider, more diverse background to apply for public appointments continues to be a key challenge. Although not something that the Commissioner can take on alone, there is a real opportunity for him to use his position to challenge government to improve. But the pressure from the Cabinet Office to reduce the amount of advertising allowed creates a tension as it may prevent attracting the best people to appointments.

Public appointments are typically low in the public’s consciousness, until something goes wrong. It then becomes an issue high on people’s minds, leading to an overwhelmingly negative perception overall. But public appointments bring an enormous amount of value to public services. The Commissioner outlined his hopes to contribute to the collective effort to promote the value of public appointments, by bringing greater clarity to the appointment process and building public confidence that all appointments are made on merit.

Further details about the event will be published on our website after the event.