A tough nut at the Home Office helm
Wednesday, April 07, 2010
A mandarin to his fingertips, civilised, urbane, yet a tough nut Sir David Normington gives Lynda King Taylor insight into how the Home Office has risen from its 'not-fit-for-purpose' depths to face the futureRunning the Home Office is nothing if not a test of nerve. "You can lose your reputation in a moment which we did," admits Sir David Normington, its permanent secretary since January 2006, "taking several years to get it back which we had to do. We are back on our feet. . . we've gone from the bottom of all to being in (Whitehall's) top half and building public confidence."
Just four months into Normington's tenure, Charles Clarke was sacked as Home Secretary and his successor John Reid described what felt like being hit by "a tidal wave of events" mostly whipped up by a migration system that was notoriously "not fit for purpose", according to Reid.
"A low moment for the Home Office," admits Sir David, "particularly for what is now the UK Border Agency." The detention and deportation of foreign national prisoners the issue that left Clarke red- faced has been "completely turned round". The Home Office was deporting around 2,300 a year in 2006. It's now nearer 5,500, says Sir David. "People can have confidence we have taken a grip on the issue at the heart of that (not fit-for-purpose) label."
The underlying problem for the department was that "our processes, IT systems and basic capabilities were in a fairly weak state and we have been relentlessly rebuilding staff capabilities while trying to improve systems and processes", he says. "The whole immigration system has changed. It's nowhere near finished but is light years on from 2006. I feel pleased about it but 'never declare victory.'"
He describes it as a complex "work in progress" with Parliamentary Ombudsman Ann Abraham's criticism still ringing in his ears over 1,300 complaints about the Border Agency in less than three years.
Sir David is a Whitehall mandarin to his fingertips, civilised, urbane, but a tough nut a feature much needed at the Home Office which operates in "the toughest areas of public policy", connecting with people's prime concerns of policing, crime, immigration. . . and also when serving four Home Secretaries in as many years. "It's just life," he says. "You have to deal with whatever the political environment serves up to you and very quickly have to work with the one you are given."
The creation of the Ministry of Justice has made "the management challenges slightly smaller" as responsibility for prisons, probation and national offender management moved over. But he admits: "There is no perfect government structure wherever you draw a dividing line it recreates other divisions. We have to work harder to ensure we join up across lines which hadn't existed before."
He is proud of what has been achieved across boundaries on counter-terrorism. "We built a capability here to lead the efforts across Whitehall," he says. "That isn't to say the challenge isn't getting greater but we have built that capability."
When he arrived from the Department for Education, Home Office accounts were in tatters. "I will never forget appearing in front of the Public Accounts Committee. Today the National Audit Office praised us for our accounts being in good shape. The biggest improvement of all is our financial capability in managing our resources and in our commercial procurement units," he says. "In my view we have the best purchasing and commercial operation in Whitehall."
He has supported change in contract and purchasing. "You recruit those who really know about commercial relationships and value for money, then the Home Office board backs them to look at things differently when demanding more of our partners and contractors," he says.
A review of all major contracts demanded better value. The department has renegotiated its IT infrastructure contracts and cut costs by more than 15 per cent. "We are all happy contractors have a lot of commitment and we have reduced costs over five to seven years." Commercial director talent has moved from the private sector into the Border Agency, the Identity Passport Service and core Home Office, and "they form a powerful triangle of people who attract other expertise as well as inspiring internal staff development. I am very keen to grow some of our own, otherwise you have this sense that everyone is coming in and no one is coming up."
He believes civil service middle managers must have confidence to change things; that everyone needs to know the value of what is being done and being spent; that every interaction is a positive one for the public.
The hoarding of data on the basis that "you never know when you might need it" is too costly. He was asked by the Home Secretary to reduce mandatory information from police and others by about 40 per cent. Central targets are disappearing, and he highlights policing's single target of gaining public confidence they have to listen to citizens' concerns and the result is a 5 per cent boost.
Sir David recently visited one of the Total Place pilots in Manchester, where local authorities, government and other agencies are focusing on support for the under-fives and their families at an early stage to improve life chances, health, wellbeing and behaviour.
There is a sense of something different at today's Home Office. He believes staff recognise "we're succeeding and we've influenced that". Budget cuts to follow will be "tough but straight-forward whichever government we have," says Sir David. "We can keep moving upwards".
On the plus side, UKBA do seem to have turned the corner. They appear to try to en-force the law in a way which IND didn’t. Most notably, UKBA are now making use of Interpol’s database of lost and stolen passports [1].
On the minus side, while UKBA say that their deployment of "smart gates" at airports is a trial [2], the Home Office assert in press releases that it increases our security [3]. Sir David should iron out that crease.
Also on the minus side, the Home Office sometimes surprise us, its parishioners, by not releasing information. The public have good reason to believe that the biometrics being used by UKBA and their cousins, IPS, are unreliable. The Home Office now have a re-port produced by IBM on the basis of which Sagem Sιcuritι have been contracted to provide biometrics technology to both UKBA and IPS. And yet the Home Office won’t publish that report [4].
It may look different inside Marsham Towers but, to an outsider, the worst problem confronting the Home Office is what looks like the unrelieved failure of IPS and their attempts to implement the Identity Cards Act 2006. Four years later, there has been no progress [5]. How does Sir David put up with IPS? How does he expect the public to put up with them?
• only 10,000 out of the UK’s prospective 50 million ID cardholders have been registered (0.02%). Compare Pakistan, where 96 million people have been registered in 10 years. Com-pare India, where the authorities are allowing themselves 11 months to register 1.2 billion people.
• it has now been confessed that the cards issued to those 10,000 people in the UK are second best and not the "gold standard" previously advertised by the Home Office, proper ID cards may start to become available in 2012
• only 34 out of the estimated 2,000 registration centres needed to enrol the population into the NIS are available (1.7%)
• we still have no reason to believe that the biometrics people register at those centres would work
• no hospitals, schools, police stations, benefits offices, banks, supermarkets, off licences, etc ... have any of the equipment needed to use the NIS to verify people’s identity
• there is no national telecommunications network connecting these users with the National Identity Register (NIR)
• there is no NIR, IPS have spent years assuming that they could use DWP’s CIS database as the basis for the NIR, they now discover that they can’t, all those years have been wasted
• we still have no reason to believe that the NIS can deliver any of the incoherent patchwork of benefits promised, or avoid any of the pitfalls that exist, such as destroying personal pri-vacy and creating a honeypot for fraudsters
In the private sector, that would be regarded as a manifest failure.
----------
1. http://dematerialisedid.com/BCSL/UKBA20100203.html#interpol
2. http://dematerialisedid.com/BCSL/UKBA20100203.html#face
3. http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/misleading_press_releases
4. http://dematerialisedid.com/BCSL/13728_Appeal.html
5. http://dematerialisedid.com/BCSL/13728_Appeal.html#failure
David Moss - London/UK/BCSL