Department For Regional Development DRD Draft Budget 2011-2015

DRAFT BUDGET 2011-15:
SPENDING AND SAVING PROPOSALS WITHIN DEPARTMENT

FOR REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT
13 JANUARY 2011
SPENDING AND SAVINGS PROPOSALS WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF
REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Contents
Page
Introduction 3
Spending Proposals 5
Savings Delivery Plans 11
Appendices
Appendix 1 Savings Delivery Plans 13
Appendix 2 Draft Budget 2010 Policy and Equality Impact 52

Assessment Consultation
[This shall be published shortly]
2
SPENDING AND SAVINGS PROPOSALS WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT
FOR REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Introduction
1. The NI Executive’s ‘Draft Budget Document 2011-15’ was announced on

the 15 December by the Minister for Finance and Personnel. The Draft
Budget set out the proposed current expenditure and capital investment
allocation for NI Departments over the four Budget periods 2011-15. It can
be accessed on the Budget website:
www.northernireland.gov.uk/budget2010
2. This paper sets out the spending proposals and savings plans for the
Department for Regional Development (DRD) over the Budget years.
Consultation Arrangements
3. The announcement of the Draft Budget commenced a period of public

consultation the closing date being 9 February 2011. This has been
extended to 16 February.
4. In parallel DRD is also running a consultation on its own departmental

spending proposals and savings plans. This will include a separate
Equality Impact Assessment details of which can be found at Appendix 2.
This shall be published shortly.
5. The Department has already met with the Assembly Committee for
Regional Development on its spending proposals and savings options.
The Department will continue to consult with the Committee and other
stakeholders over the coming weeks.
3
6. We are also interested in hearing your views on any aspect of the attached
documents and would ask all interested parties to provide their responses
prior to the consultation closing date of 16 February 2011.
7. If this document is not in a format that suits you please let us know.
Contact details can be found below.
Contact Details
Roger Downey
Acting Director of Finance
Department for Regional Development
Room 4.27
Clarence Court
10-18 Adelaide Street
Belfast
BT2 8GB
Telephone: 02890 540848
E-mail: DRD.BudgetConsultation@drdni.gov.uk
8. Comments should be sent to arrive no later than 16 February 2011.
9. Individual replies will not be issued to respondents, but a list of

respondents together with responses will be published on the
Department’s website. If you do not wish your response or name to be
published on the website please advise in your correspondence to us.
4
DRAFT BUDGET 2010 SPENDING PROPOSALS - DEPARTMENT FOR
REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT (DRD)
10. The Executive’s priority in this Budget is to stimulate the economy, tackle
disadvantage, protect the most vulnerable in our society and protect front
line services. As historically the largest capital department, DRD has a
lead role to improve the infrastructure to support this within the available
funding.
11. The overall aim of the Department is to improve quality of life by securing
transport and water infrastructure and shaping the region’s long-term
strategic development. In pursuing this aim the key objectives of the
Department are:
• Objective A - Supporting the economy by planning, developing and

maintaining safe and sustainable transportation networks; promoting
airport and harbour services; addressing regional imbalance in
infrastructure; and shaping the long-term future of the region; and
• Objective B - Contributing to the health and well-being of the

community and the protection of the environment by maintaining and
developing the policy and regulatory environment which provides
sustainable, high quality water and sewerage services.
Investment in Public Services in 2011-15
12. The Draft Budget allocations for 2011-15 are set out in Tables 1 and 2
below.
5
Table 1 - Department for Regional Development – Current Expenditure
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

Objective and Spending Area £m £m £m £m
Objective A
Roads 209.5 200.8 194.9 188.7
Transport 90.5 92.8 71.1 71.7
Total Objective A 300.0 293.6 266.0 260.4
Objective B
Water and Sewerage 200.3 193.6 193.6 193.6
Total Objective B 200.3 193.6 193.6 193.6
Total 500.3 487.2 459.6 454.0
Table 2 - Department for Regional Development – Investment

Expenditure
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

Objective and Spending Area £m £m £m £m
Objective A
Roads 144.9 254.5 387.4 324.7
Transport 90.7 25.7 13.3 53.9
EU Structural Funds 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2
Total Objective A 235.8 280.3 400.9 378.8
Objective B
Water and Sewerage 202.5 145.0 140.0 180.0
Total Objective B 202.5 145.0 140.0 180.0
Total 438.3 425.3 540.9 558.8
13. The Draft Budget allocations would help DRD to continue to improve
elements of our roads, transport and water infrastructure. They would also
allow us to continue to fund the majority of our existing programmes
including concessionary fares across DRD, albeit at a much reduced level.
14. The Draft Budget allocations would provide capital investment to DRD of
almost £2 billion over the Budget 2010 period. This includes over £1.1
6
billion for roads, around £185 million for public transport and over £665
million for water and sewerage services.
15. However whilst Roads Service has a significant allocation, around £790
million (or 70% of it) is tied up in two major road schemes – the A5
between Derry and Aughnacloy and the A8 between Belfast and Larne.
The Department acknowledges the Republic of Ireland's contribution of
£400 million towards the A5 and A8 schemes (of which £274 million is
scheduled for this Budget period). However the overall reduction of 40%
in the Executive’s Spending Review settlement, and the scale of these
schemes, means that that there are no allocations to commence
construction on other major roads schemes such as:
• the A6 Randalstown to Castledawson;

• the A2 Greenisland;
• the York Street Flyover; and
• the Sydenham Bypass Widening.
16. In addition there will be significant reductions in other capital improvement

programmes such as walking and cycling, traffic calming, collision
remedial, traffic management measures, local safety improvements and
bridge strengthening. The impact will be particularly severe in 2012-13
and 2013-14.
17. This funding of the A5 and A8 also reduces the available funding for the
transport and water and sewerage programmes, and there is no funding
for the Knockmore to Lurgan track replacement or to fund the Utility
Regulator’s recommended capital funding level in 2012-13.
18. As part of the Draft Budget the Executive signalled its intent to continue to
focus on additional revenue raising methods. If, over the course of the
budget period, additional funding became available to DRD as a
consequence of such methods then the Department would seek to allocate
7
funding to valuable projects which are currently unfunded, such as the
Knockmore to Lurgan rail track improvement project, major roads schemes
like those noted at paragraph 15 above, and further funding to meet the
current investment shortfall for water and sewerage infrastructure.
19. The Department would still however be able to take forward the following
projects.
Roads
20. On roads, the allocations would allow the Department to begin

construction of:
• the 85km dual carriageway on the A5 between Derry and Aughnacloy;

• the 14km dual carriageway on the A8 between Belfast and Larne;
• the A32 in Enniskillen, providing improved transport links and
improving access to the new acute hospital in Enniskillen; and
• continue development work on the A6 Dungiven to Derry.
21. The Draft Budget allocations in capital and current expenditure for roads
structural maintenance total around £94m / £52m / £56m / £82m over the
Budget period. This averages at around current levels totalling over £280
million over the four year period. However these levels of structural
maintenance expenditure are still around £200 million short of levels
recommended in the Structural Maintenance funding Plan over the Budget
period (at nominal prices). It should be noted that given the profile of
expenditure on the A5 and A8, the available funding is much lower in
years 2012-13 and 2013-14 – falling from a record high of £94 million in
year 2011-12.
8
22. This level of investment, coupled with reductions in roads maintenance
activities, is predicted to lead to the network being less resilient to extreme
weather events such as freeze / thaw cycles and flooding.
Transport
23. On transport the Draft Budget allocations would allow the Department to
continue to support Translink to:
• procure 20 new trains to replace the 13 trains that are life expired and
provide additional trains to enhance capacity on the commuter
corridors;
• build a new train maintenance facility, including engineering and
workshop facilities;
• begin the Coleraine to Derry rail track improvement project by the end
of the Budget period;
• replace hand-held ticketing machines on train services; and
• replace some elements of the existing bus fleet.
24. The spending proposals would also allow the Department to fund the
development of a bus based Rapid Transit system on a pilot network of
three routes connecting East Belfast, West Belfast and Titanic Quarter
with and through the City Centre.
25. In addition DRD would be able to plan to invest in a number of sustainable

transport initiatives - electric vehicle charging infrastructure, the ‘Belfast on
the Move’ proposals, and some other bus priority measures.
Water And Sewerage
26. On water and sewerage the allocations would also allow DRD to provide
funding to NI Water to help meet the priorities agreed by the Executive (in
Social and Environmental Guidance for Water and Sewerage Services -
9
May 2010) to maintain and improve our infrastructure, deliver sustainable
and affordable levels of service to consumers and meet EU compliance
obligations. The levels of funding are based on an assessment by the NI
Authority for Utility Regulation (Water and Sewerage Services Price
Control 2010-2013 Final Determination – February 2010
http://www.uregni.gov.uk/uploads/publications/Final_Main_Report_PC10_
FD_-_Main_Report_0300_revised_web_version.pdf
27. NI Water will continue to deliver the improvements in its significant capital
works programme over the three year Price Control (PC10) period. This
includes:
• 900km of water mains rehabilitation;

• 4 new trunk main schemes;
• quality improvements at 2 water treatment works;
• increased capacity at 13 service reservoirs or clear water tanks;
• renewing / relining 72km of sewer;
• quality improvements at 43 waste water treatment works; and
• addressing 117 unsatisfactory intermittent sewage discharges.
28. Recent interruptions to water supplies have highlighted the ongoing need
for adequate investment in our water and sewerage infrastructure.
Investment in 2011-12 and 2014-15 is largely as planned. However in
2012-13 and 2013-14 only around three quarters of the planned
investment has been allocated. Although the funding will not meet all
proposals it is still a significant level of investment of £203m / £145m /
£140m / £180m. The Regulator’s Determination targets are subject to
revision once budgetary allocations are agreed as part of the Revised
Budget and the Department will work with NI Water, the Regulator and
other stakeholders to undertake any necessary re-prioritisation.
10
Savings Delivery Plans
29. DRD will take forward a range of measures to deliver the additional
savings of £15.7m / £28.8m / £56.4m / £62m current expenditure by 2014-
15. The main areas for the proposed savings include:
Roads
• Increased parking charges;

• Reductions in expenditure on technical advisors and depreciation;
• Savings in street lighting energy and parking enforcement; and
• Reductions in maintenance activities.
Transport
• Savings from Park and Ride through reduced service specification;

• Public Transport Reform Savings;
• Reduced expenditure on technical advisors;
• Dividend from Ports: and
• Reduction in reimbursement / subsidy rates to Translink.
Water and Sewerage
• The Regulator’s assessment of the level of funding required by NI

Water to deliver the Executive’s priorities and maintain water and
sewerage services.
30. Details of these savings and their impacts are available in the
Department’s Savings Delivery Plans (SDPs) in Appendix 1.
31. Due to the historic underfunding of the railway Public Service Obligation
the Department proposes to allocate around £13 million over the Budget
period to this programme. £5.2 million of this is proposed to be funded
11
from additional savings in the SDPs and £7.7 million from a reclassification
from capital expenditure. The Department also proposes to reclassify £1.6
million from capital expenditure to fund roads maintenance activities in
current expenditure in 2014-15. These reclassifications are subject to
Executive approval as part of the Revised Budget process.
12
Appendix 1
DEPARTMENT FOR REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT (DRD)
SAVINGS DELIVERY PLANS
Introduction
The Department is required to fund cumulative current expenditure reductions

of £17.0m / £30.1m / £57.7m / £63.3m over the Budget period from the
opening 2010-11 budget position of £517.3m.
Included in the £517.3m is an allocation of £1.3m for roads and transport

Invest to Save projects. As this is automatically returned to the Executive as
part of the terms of the original allocation, DRD has to fund the remaining
reductions of £15.7m / £28.8m / £56.4m / £62m totalling £162.9m. This is set
out as follows.
Table 1 – Calculation of Savings Delivery Plan (SDP) Targets
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

£m £m £m £m
Draft Budget Current
Expenditure Reductions
in each year 17.0 30.1 57.7 63.3
Removal of 2010-11
Invest to Save (1.3) (1.3) (1.3) (1.3)
Savings Delivery
Plan Targets 15.7 28.8 56.4 62.0
The Department is treating these reductions as the overall savings target.

There are no proposals to make further savings to allocate additional funding
to existing current expenditure programmes.
13
Context
There have already been significant reductions to the Department’s current

expenditure budget over recent years:
• Budget 2004 required the Department to deliver savings of £17.8m /

£30.3m / £39.4m over the period 2005-08;
• Budget 2007 required the delivery of further efficiencies of £22.5m /

£44.3m / £65.4m over the period 2008-11; and
• the ‘Review of 2010-11 Spending Plans’ reduced DRD’s current

expenditure baselines by a further £45.3m.
Significantly though in previous budgets, these savings were mitigated by

additional allocations. This is not the case in this budget.
Approach
It has been a very difficult process to identify savings to these levels and the
Department has looked at all programmes across DRD.
The process of reviewing savings and income generation options has been
led by the senior management within the Department and a series of
workshops has been conducted with the Minister. Each option has been
considered by the Minister and senior management against an agreed list of
priorities in order to assess the relative impact of each option put forward.
The options proposed reflect the Department’s Objectives and Minister’s
priorities.
Each saving proposal has also been subject to an equality screening to

identify the differential equality impacts on Section 75 groups. Consideration
was also given to the impact on sustainable development, good relations,
14
poverty and social inclusion. A detailed Equality Impact Assessment can be
found at Appendix 2. This shall be published shortly.
Summary of Savings Required
The Department’s proposed savings are summarised in the following table.

Table 2 - Budget 2010 Savings Delivery Plan Summary
Title of Savings Spending Type of

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total
Measure Area Savings
(£000’s) (£000’s) (£000’s) (£000’s) (£000’s)
Increased Increasing
Roads 2,000 8,500 12,500 14,500 37,500
Parking Charges Revenue
Reductions in
Expenditure on
8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 Administration /
Technical Roads 32,000
Policy
Advisors and
Depreciation
Reductions in
300 1,500 2,440 660 Lower Priority
Maintenance Roads 4,900
Programmes
Activities
Savings in Street
Lighting Energy 1,400 2,400 3,400 3,400
Roads 10,600 Procurement
and Parking
Enforcement
Park and Ride Transport 500 700 700 700 2,600 Procurement
Concessionary 400 400 400 400

Transport 1,600 Policy
Fares Policy
Rural Transport
Transport - 300 600 800 1,700 Funding
Fund
Transport
Programme for
- 700 700 900 2,300 Funding
People with Transport
Disabilities
Public Transport 2,000 700 700 700

Transport 4,100 Funding
Reform
Rathlin Ferry
Transport - - 200 200 400 Funding
Subsidy
NILGOSC
Subsidy,
Reimbursement
Transport - 860 5,800 2,800 9,460 Funding
Rates and Fuel
Duty Rebate to
NITHC
15
Title of Savings Spending Type of
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total
Measure Area Savings
(£000’s) (£000’s) (£000’s) (£000’s) (£000’s)
Technical Transport Administration /
1,100 1,740 1,760 1,740 6,340
Advisors and Core Policy
Dividend from - - 15,000 15,000 Increasing

Transport 30,000
Ports Revenue
Based on Water
Regulator’s and - 6,200 6,200 6,200 18,600 Funding
assessment Sewerage
Sub Total 15,700 32,000 58,400 56,000 162,100
Proposed switch
from capital
Budget - - - 6,000 6,000
Additional
savings
proposed to be
- (3,200) (2,000) - (5,200)
reallocated to
the Railway
Public Service
Obligation
Total
15,700 28,800 56,400 62,000 162,900
The savings reflect reductions of 3.3% / 5.8% / 11.2% / 12.2% on the

Department’s 2010-11 opening baseline of £517.3m and are outlined in
more detail in the Draft Budget Savings Delivery Plans at Annex 1.
Reclassification from capital to current expenditure
The Department proposes to reclassify £6m of capital to current expenditure

in 2014-15 to mitigate the current expenditure reductions in that year. This
reclassification is subject to Executive approval as part of the Revised
Budget process.
16
Draft Budget Savings Delivery Plans (SDPs) Annex 1
1. Title of Savings Measure

DRD
Department
Savings Measure Increased Parking Charges and Penalties
Spending Area & UoB Roads Service A0102
Senior Responsible Officer B Cairns / S Richardson
Date of Latest Version of Delivery 11/01/2011

Plan
Date Assembly committee consulted 12/01/2011
on Delivery Plan
2. Forecast of Savings Accruing from Savings Measure (£000’s)

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Admin 0 0 0 0
Resource 2,000 8,500 12,500 14,500
Total 2,000 8,500 12,500 14,500
3. Summary of Savings Measure.

Provide summary details of the savings measure including supporting evidence for
the forecast level of savings.
This saving comprises increased income from car parking charges in three areas:
(1) an average 15% per annum increase to existing car park income for each of the
budget years;
(2) an increase in the penalty for parking illegally; and
(3) currently only three cities have on-street parking charges. Additional revenue could
be raised by introducing on-street charging to all towns / cities covered by the Sub
Regional Transport Plan (SRTP) and Belfast Metropolitan Transport Plan (BMTP) –
approx 27 towns / cities. The extension of charging hours for all car parks and on-
street Pay and Display (P&D) could also be considered.
4. Impact on Frontline Services of Savings Measure.

Will the savings measure have an impact on the standard of
No
public services provided to the public?
If yes, provide a clear justification as well as any mitigating actions.
5. Timetable for Actions to Deliver Savings.

Action Target Outcome
Date
2010-11 car park tariff review was completed and agreed in April 2011 Implement 1st review
July 2010. This will be implemented in April 2011.
At the beginning of each year of the Budget an annual tariff April 2012 Implement the January
review will be commissioned for implementation the April 2013 2011/12/13 reviews
following April. April 2014
17
Date
Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) increase. Amend Penalty Feb 2011 Start process
Charge regulations including consultation/EQIA if required.
Dec 2011 Complete process
Implement new PCN level. Apr 2012
Extending on-street P&D. Establishment of a Project Board Mar 2011

to oversee this project.
Development of parking schemes in each of the 27 towns / Mar 2012

cities being considered and completion of the legislative
process including consultation.
Installation of parking schemes (signs, lines and machines) Oct 2012

on a phased basis.
6. Summary of Implementation Costs for Savings Measure.

Please provide details of any implementation costs and how they will be funded.
There will be significant implementation costs for the purchase and installation of the equipment and
the associated signing and road markings – approx. £5m.
7. Key risks and interdependencies to implementation of Savings Measure and

details of contingencies.
Key risks Probability Impact Contingent Action(s)
of risk of risk
occurring (1-5)*
(1-5)*
Public opposition 2 4 Public statements to highlight
the time since last increases
and disparity between Roads
Service and private car parks.
Comparison of cost of PCNs
in GB would also be useful.
Introducing on-street P&D
across all towns should be
promoted as equitable for all.
Reduction in usage levels for car parks. 4 2 Only in the latter years of the
Budget would prices start to
compare with the private
sector so usage is likely to
continue.
Reduction in numbers of PCNs 2 4 Likely that numbers of
violations may reduce but will
be compensated by the
increased tariff.
Potential Impact on other departments and public bodies. Mitigating Action(s)

None.
18
* 1 is the highest and 5 the least
8. Summary of assessment of potential impact in respect of Equality, Good
Relations and Sustainable Development as well as details of any mitigating
actions.
Impact Mitigating Action(s)

Impact across all Section 75 groups. Creating this additional
income will protect funding for
Could be negative impact on good relations if individuals are the Department’s core
deterred by high cost of parking form using neutral town/city centres. programmes and maintain its
focus on the delivery of
Positive impact in terms of sustainable development as it may transport services to
encourage greater use of public transport. individuals.
19
DRD
Department
Reduction in expenditure on technical advisors
Savings Measure and depreciation
Senior Responsible Officer J White /J Saulters

Plan
on Delivery Plan

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Admin 0 0 0 0
Resource 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000
Total 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000

Provide summary details of the savings measure including supporting evidence for the forecast
level of savings.
This budget covers the requirement for technical advisor fees in respect of a wide variety of
commissions. These include the “external” professional advisor costs incorporating the Design Build
Finance Operate (DBFO) professional advisors and incorporate a wide variety of commissions
including the Road Service Consultant (RSC) partnership contract, travel surveys, telematics,
geotechnical certification, Traffic Impact Assessments, feasibility studies, parking schemes and bridge
assessments.
The full saving is realised in year one and anticipates the reduction in DBFO work and a much reduced
capital programme going forward.
Given that there has been significant investment in the trunk road and motorway network in recent
years, that DBFO contracts cover significant sections of this part of the network and that these roads
are maintained at defined levels, there is scope to achieve this depreciation saving.

No
20
Action Target Date Outcome
Issue reduced allocations to match the reduced Technical April 2011 Reduced Professional
Advisor Fees Budget and Advisor Costs
subsequent
years
Manage the depreciation budget in line with maintenance March 2011 Maintenance and
expenditure plans. depreciation plans for
the Budget period.

None.

of risk of risk
occurring (1-5)*
(1-5)*
Inability to conduct pre-scheme feasibility 1 3 Roads Service will review
studies and other pre-contract work could pre-scheme preparation in
delay the potential to spend improved budget years 3 and 4.
capital funds in the next budget.
Inability to provide “One Off” technical 1 3 Roads Service will review

support to arising needs pre-scheme preparation in
budget years 3 and 4.
Inability to develop further DBFO packages 2 3

if required.
Increased maintenance on trunk road 5 4 Retain sufficient depreciation

network is required. budget in DEL.
(Depreciation)
Other elements of DEL depreciation 3 3 Retain sufficient depreciation

increase. budget in DEL.
(Depreciation)
Further structural maintenance funding is 4 5 Continue to prioritise funding

received in-year. in favour of non-trunk roads.
(Depreciation) Retain sufficient DEL budget
should more trunk road
maintenance be required.
None.
21
actions.
No impact.
22
DRD
Department
Reductions in Maintenance Activities
Savings Measure
Senior Responsible Officer A Murray/R Crilly

Plan
on Delivery Plan

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Admin 0 0 0 0
Resource 300 1,500 2,440 660
Total 300 1,500 2,440 660

The Roads Service maintenance guidelines for safety will be amended to reduce the
frequency and range of maintenance activities, in order to ensure that more urgent / safety
related maintenance can be delivered. Areas where savings may be achieved include car
park maintenance, grass cutting and weed control, maintenance of street trees, patching,
structures, gully emptying, traffic signs and road markings.
As maintenance functions within the Resource block are already funded to optimum levels
savings can not be achieved without an immediate impact on service delivery.

Will the savings measure have an impact on the standard Yes
As all of the savings relate to the costs of frontline services, the standards of service to
the public will reduce. The effects are likely to include:
- car parks with defective surfaces and litter present;

- longer grass and more weeds in road verges;
- poorly maintained street trees;
- less frequently cleaned road signs;
- poorly maintained road markings; and
- increased numbers of blocked gullies.
Roads Service will attempt to mitigate the effects on the public, by concentrating on
those elements of our work that are most closely related to safety.
23
Amend Road Maintenance Standards for safety. Mid
February
2012
Implement savings measures for each of the four years 1st April
each year &
ongoing

None.

of risk of risk
occurring (1-5)*
(1-5)*
Road safety 3 3 Increased levels of
inspections and reactive
maintenance. Repair of
safety-related defects as a
priority. Re-focussing of
guidelines toward safety as a
priority. Large part of
Motorway network maintained
by DBFO Cos.
Increased Public Liability claims 3 3 Guidelines will be amended

to set revised standards. The
success of which will only be
determined after being tested
in the courts.
Public perception/reputational damage 1 5 Budget consultation will
provide an opportunity to
communicate the changes
and reassure the public.
Long term damage to the network and 3 4 Investigate possible savings /

additional expense due to lack of planned efficiencies in other areas
maintenance such as patching. which may result in a
reduction of damage to the
network. Explore new
methods of delivering
maintenance.

Possible increase in the numbers of public liability claims could Advise public to be more
affect the courts system as well as the Department of Health if vigilant.
injuries caused are serious.
24
actions.
Impact across all Section 75 groups. Roads service will attempt to
mitigate effects by
Car park Defective Surfaces – could potentially impact on those who concentrating work on that
are disabled, elderly and those with dependants. most closely related to safety.
Less frequently cleaned road signs could potentially impact on those

who are disabled.
Regarding Sustainable Development, the frequency of gully cleaning

may result in increased risk of flood damage to home and
transportation infrastructure.
Reduction in weed control may impact on industry and commerce

due to transportation and access difficulties due to overgrown
hedgerows, especially in rural areas.
25
DRD
Department
Procurement of Street Lighting Energy and
Savings Measure Parking Enforcement.
Senior Responsible Officer B Cairns/S Richardson/F Miskelly

Plan
on Delivery Plan

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Admin 0 0 0 0
Resource 1,400 2,400 3,400 3,400
Total 1,400 2,400 3,400 3,400

Procurement efficiencies in the supply of street lighting energy could produce savings from
2011 onward.
Cost savings could be made through the introduction of a revised car park services contract
in mid-2012. It is anticipated that a fundamental review of the provision, including revised
service levels, a change in how some car parks are operated and the introduction of new
technology could result in these levels of savings once the new contract is introduced.

Yes/No
To realise the savings in the new car park services contract it is likely that the number of traffic
attendants deployed will be reduced. This has a risk that illegal parking will increase due to
decreased enforcement with the knock on effect of increased congestion and reduced access
to town centres. The use of modern technology may go some way to offsetting the reduction in
deployment levels.
26
Date
Establish a car park services contract procurement team to Feb 2011
deliver a new contract by the start date of October 2012
Complete the tender process and appoint a new service Jun 2012
provider
New contract commences with reduced contract costs. Oct 2012
Liaise with Central Procurement Directorate (CPD) to agree Dec 2010 Tender advertised w/c 13
specification and timetable to tender for a 12 month Dec 2010.
contract for public lighting electricity.
Agree procurement strategy and contract arrangements for Dec 2011

public lighting electricity for 2012 - 2015 with CPD, and put
in place arrangements for tendering as required.

There will be implementation costs for the replacement of manned kiosks with pay and display
equipment – approx £600k.

of risk of risk
occurring (1-5)*
(1-5)*
Not sufficient interest in the competition.
Competition will be widely
Car Park Services 5 2 advertised and Roads
Service will monitor interest
Public Lighting Electricity 5 4 from possible tenderers.
Competition does not produce required
efficiencies. Roads Service will provide
tendering firms with
Car Park Services 2 5 appropriate information so
profit margins can be
accurately forecast. Roads
Service set level of service to
try and meet efficiency
savings.
Public Lighting Electricity 2 5 Alternative efficiency savings

may need to be found, such
as dimming or removal of
street lights or introducing
shorter burning hours.
27
of risk of risk
occurring (1-5)*
(1-5)*
No operator is found.
Roads Service could opt to
Car Park Services 5 1 continue with existing supplier
or perform the services itself.
Enforcement could be
reduced or suspended.
Public Lighting Electricity 5 5 If no operator found, NIE

Energy would be the default
supplier.

None

actions.
No significant impact.
28
DRD
Department
Savings Measure Park and Ride
Spending Area & UoB Transport Policy A0203
Senior Responsible Officer B White

Plan
on Delivery Plan

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Admin 0 0 0 0
Resource 500 700 700 700
Total 500 700 700 700

The Department had originally secured funding for Park and Ride services that would have
allowed the Cairnshill services to be competitively tendered.
The savings will be effected by making a direct award to Translink to provide a service at a
reduced specification compared to that originally intended

No

Date
No timetable required.

None
29
of risk of risk
occurring (1-5)*
(1-5)*
No specific risks identified
None

actions.
No impacts on Section 75 groups.
There is no impact on good relations or social inclusion.
May be minor negative impact on sustainable development as

reduced specification may make the service less attractive and so
prove less effective in promoting sustainable development.
30
DRD
Department
Savings Measure Concessionary Fares Policy
Spending Area & UoB Transport Policy – A0203

Plan
on Delivery Plan

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Admin 0 0 0 0
Resource 400 400 400 400
Total 400 400 400 400

This is purely an administrative saving and no service reduction is required. Costs in this
area relate to the issue of new passes and the administrative and other costs of changes to
the Northern Ireland Concessionary Fares Scheme. The saving is predicated on the
assumption that the scheme will not be extended or significantly revised during the relevant
period.

No

Date
No timetable required.

None

of risk of risk
occurring (1-5)*
(1-5)*
No specific risks to identify as this is an
administrative saving
None
• 1 is the highest and 5 the least
31
actions.
The service offered to the public remains the same, the change is to
the administrative process. Therefore there is no impact on any
Section 75 groups.
There is no impact anticipated on good relations, sustainable

development or social inclusion.
32
DRD
Department
Rural Transport Fund –
• Reduction in support to Community

Transport Association (CTA) for advice
and support;
Savings Measure • Reduction of services provided by
Translink in rural areas;
• Reduction in the number of Rural
Community Transport Partnerships; and
• Withdrawal of group transport services.
Spending Area & UoB Rural Transport Fund – A0203

Plan
on Delivery Plan

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Admin 0 0 0 0
Resource 0 300 600 800
Total 0 300 600 800

• Reduction in support paid to the Community Transport Association;

• Reduction in support to Translink to provide uneconomical rural services;
• Reduce the number of Partnerships who receive support from the RTF; and
• Withdraw support for group transport services,
33
Yes
a. The CTA provides the Department with advice and guidance in relation to the Rural
Transport Fund and also provides training to the staff and Board of the Rural Community
Transport Partnerships. The Department considers that with the significant improvements
made in the governance of Partnerships together with a reduction in their numbers means
that the level of advice and training required can be significantly reduced. Each new
partnership will cover a larger area ensuring the same level of service is being offered to the
public.
b.Currently Rural Community Transport Partnerships are funded to provide group transport as
well as transport for individuals. The Department considers that meeting the travel needs of
individuals is an important element in reducing social exclusion and has recently been
increasing individual travel while at the same time reducing group travel. Savings would be
achieved through the withdrawal of group transport. The Department considers that it is
important to protect its core programme of providing transport for individuals and believes
that most of the groups affected have the ability to raise funds from other sources to assist
with their travel provision.
c. Currently the Department provides support from the RTF to Translink to operate rural
services that are socially necessary but uneconomic to run. Proposals would see the
reduction in the level of funding in years 2, 3 and 4. The change would be effected by
tightening the criteria for support. While this would lead to a reduction in the number of
services, other services such as Door-to-Door or the RTF may provide an alternative.
d.As well as being supported for the provision of services, the Rural Community Transport
Partnerships are given support for administrative costs. The Department intends to reduce
the number of Partnerships which receive support from the Rural Transport Fund from
sixteen to seven. This should be achievable without any impact on the services being
delivered.

Date
Meet with CTA to discuss budget allocation and get them to June 2011 Business Plan completed
complete business plan for 2013 - 2015 for Budget period
reflecting allocation
Advise Partnerships and service providers in writing of the March 2011 No support for group
Departments intention to cease providing support for group services with effect from
travel and voucher scheme with effect from 31 March 2012. 1 April 2012
Advise Translink of Department’s intention to reduce June 2011 Amended FM, new
support from 1 April 2013 and amend Financial criteria agreed and
Memorandum (FM) and support criteria implemented
Continue to work towards the reduction in the number of On-going Number of Partnerships
Partnerships receiving support from the RTF to 7 by 31 reduced by 31 March
March 2012 2012
34
Implementation costs to a maximum of £300k to assist Partnerships with legal and HR costs relating
to potential amalgamations and also assistance towards any redundancy costs. These costs will be
met from the RTF budget.

of risk of risk
occurring (1-5)*
(1-5)*
Lack of co-operation from stakeholders 1 3 Effective communication and
proper planning
Negative political reaction to plans 1 4 Communication and

discussion with elected
representatives
Negative public reaction to plans 1 3 Effective communication and

proper planning
None

actions.
The reduction in rural Translink services and withdrawal of group The streamlining of process
travel may have a negative impact on women, younger people, older leading to the reduction in
people, people with dependants, people with disabilities, CTA partnerships and the
Nationalists, and Catholics as surveys have identified that these removal of lesser used
groups are the main users of the services. services will allow the
Department to protect its core
No significant impact on good relations programme and maintain its
Withdrawal of group travel and funding to Translink for some transport services to
uneconomical rural services will have a negative impact on: individuals.
• Sustainability, as it may force people to go back to using
private care; and
• Poverty and social inclusion, for vulnerable rural dwellers.
35
Department DRD
Transport Programme for People with Disabilities:
• Reduction in support to Shopmobility;

• Reduction in funding for Door-to-Door
services;
Savings Measure
• Reduction in Easibus services provided
by Translink; and
• Cessation of group transport provided by
Disability Action.
Transport Programme for People with Disabilities

Spending Area & UoB
– A0203

Plan
on Delivery Plan

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Admin 0 0 0 0
Resource 0 700 700 900
Total 0 700 700 900

• Reduction in support paid to Shopmobility schemes;
• Reduction in support for Door-to-Door services;
• Reduction in support to Translink for Easibus services; and
• Withdraw support for group transport services provided by Disability Action.
36
Yes
Some of the current Shopmobility Schemes have proven unsuccessful in terms of generating
usage and do not represent value for money. The Department will systematically withdraw
funding to these schemes while at the same time investigating ways of meeting the needs of
local people.
Easibus services in Belfast and Derry were recently reviewed and it is considered that they
are no longer required as they are largely duplicated by the existing bus network. The
Department will work with Translink and local stakeholders to make adjustments to the
existing network to ensure that the transport needs of Easibus users are met where possible.
Demand for Door-to-Door services in the evenings has historically been low. The Department
intends to reduce the availability of evening services while at the same time protecting and
increasing access to the heavily used core services.
Currently the Department provides support to Disability Action to provide Group Travel to a
number of organisations representing people with disabilities. This is the only scheme fully
funded by the Department and has been superseded to a degree by the introduction of Door-
to-Door services. The Department considers it appropriate to systematically withdraw support
for these services in order to protect its core Door-to-Door services for and also considers that
the groups affected have the capacity to secure replacement funding from other sources

Date
Meet with underperforming Shopmobility Schemes. June 2011 Give 3-6 months notice
of cessation of funding.
Undertake review of Belfast Easibus Scheme March 2012 Support for Easibus to
end in March 2014.
New Door-to-Door contract to allow for a reduced number April 2012 Availability of evening
of trips outside the hours of 9am and 5pm. trips will be reduced in
April 2012.
Meet with Disability Action to advise them that funding will January Funding will cease in
cease in March 2012 2011 2012
37
No implementation costs envisaged.

of risk of risk
occurring (1-5)*
(1-5)*
Lack of co-operation from stakeholders 1 3 Effective communication and
proper planning
Negative political reaction to plans 1 4 Communication and

discussion with elected
representatives
Negative public reaction to plans 1 3 Effective communication and

proper planning
None None
38
actions.
The withdrawal of Easibus services may have a negative impact on Removal of Easibus is in
women, older people (over 45), and people with disabilities, as cognisance of improved
surveys have identified these groups as the main users of the accessibility to current
services. scheduled town services
following significant
investment in upgrading of
the Ulsterbus fleet since
Easibus was introduced.
Reduction in support to shop mobility, and the cessation of group Only underperforming shop
transport provided by Disability Action may have a minor negative mobility schemes are losing
impact on women, older people and people with disabilities. funding.
Reduction in operating hours of Door to Door may have a negative The Department will continue
impact on older people, women, those from a Protestant and to fund Door-to Door which
Unionist background, those who have been widowed and people operates for individuals who
with disabilities. are disabled and in need of
transport.
Door to Door services are

being maintaining during its
peak operating hours.
The removal/reduction of
these services will allow the
There is no impact anticipated on good relations and sustainability. Department to protect its core
programme and maintain its
The withdrawal of funding for group travel may have negative impact transport services to
on social inclusion however door to door is still in operation which individuals.
may be used as an alternative.
39
DRD
Department
Reductions in cost of public transport reform
Savings Measure
Spending Area & UoB Transport A0203

Plan
on Delivery Plan

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Admin 0 0 0 0
Resource 2,000 700 700 700
Total 2,000 700 700 700

The savings have been achieved through delaying the implementation of the new
arrangements, analysing the functions and process involved and benchmarking the required
resources with other Authority-type functions elsewhere. This will result in efficiencies in the
way the new institutional arrangements are designed and implemented.

No
The efficiencies will not impact on frontline services. However, any further delay or reduction
in the resources made available to perform Authority-type functions would begin to impact on
services as new contractual arrangements would be implemented without effective contract
specification and management.

Date
Defer implementation of the new institutional arrangements. April 2011 £2m savings
Implement new streamlined public transport reform April 2012 £0.7m savings annually
arrangements.

The costs of designing the new arrangements have largely been incurred already. No significant
additional costs are envisaged.
40
of risk of risk
occurring (1-5)*
(1-5)*
The new arrangements have been designed
to handle the required efficiencies. Risks
would arise only if further efficiency
measures are necessary.

N/A

actions.
The new institutional arrangements have been designed to avoid N/A
any adverse impact on equality, good relations or sustainability and
an EQIA and a rural impact assessment have been completed for
the underlying reform programme. The implementation of the
efficiency saving is not expected to have any adverse impacts.
There is no impact anticipated on good relations, sustainable
development or social inclusion.
41
DRD
Department
Rathlin Ferry subsidy
Savings Measure
Spending Area & UoB Ports and Public Transport Division – A0208

Plan
on Delivery Plan

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Admin 0 0 0 0
Resource 0 0 200 200
Total 0 0 200 200

Indicative savings released from consultancy support due to Small Ferries Project not
proceeding within Budget period and from negotiations on variation of contract to achieve
reduced subsidy requirement.

No

Date
Negotiate variation of contract April 2011 Reduced subsidy
requirement for
remainder of contract.

In-house staff costs.
42
of risk of risk
occurring (1-5)*
(1-5)*
None identified at this stage

None

actions.
No impact.
43
DRD
Department
Remove NILGOSC subsidy, restrict
Concessionary Fares Reimbursement Rates and
Savings Measure
reduce amount of Fuel Duty Rebate available to
NITHC
Spending Area & UoB Road Passenger Services A0203
Senior Responsible Officer C Doran

Plan
on Delivery Plan

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Admin nil nil nil nil
Resource nil 860 5,800 2,800
Total nil 860 5,800 2,800

The overall impact on the two bus companies of the savings and unfunded pressures will
mean a combination of fare increases and efficiency savings above the levels set out in the
review Outline Business Case for Public Transport reform. The budget settlement restricts
the level of revenue support to the bus companies despite anticipated increases in
Concessionary travel and Fuel Duty. This will require Translink to look at further ways of
reducing costs and ways of generating more income, including from fares.

Yes
In order to achieve further significant efficiency savings it will be necessary to reduce services
in Belfast and across the Ulsterbus network. This will be based on the levels of current and
projected usage. The service cuts could lead to a number of job losses.

Date
DRD will discuss the funding available over the next four Mid 2011 Production of Translink’s
years, and the impact of the savings and unfunded although Business and Corporate
pressures, with Translink, who will then produce their plans for Plan
Corporate Plan to demonstrate exactly how the savings will next year
impact on their business. This could take some time and should be in
cannot be finalised until Final Budget completed. place earlier
44
The efficiencies to be realised per the Outline Business Case for Public Transport Reform will lead to
redundancies, the cost of which would have to be covered by Translink.

of risk of risk
occurring (1-5)*
(1-5)*
Translink may have to meet revenue 3 2
shortfalls through fare increases. Demand
by fare paying passengers for public
transport is likely to be affected by
increases in fares.
Large increases in fares and service cuts 3 2
could mean that the current PSA target of
77m passenger journeys will not be met.
This will depend on the relative price of
Public Transport and continued trends on
Concessionary Fares as well as wider
transport policy including availability of car
parks and bus priority measures.

The agreement of the Schools transport contract has a direct impact DRD will be discussing these
on Translink and funding constraints in the Department of Education issues with DE
(DE) could be key interdependency.

actions.
Fare increases will have a negative impact on all Section 75 groups,

especially women, younger people and people with disabilities, who
have less access to private car transport.
Translink are also subject to Section 75 obligations therefore would

have to screen their subsequent actions for S75 implications.
Increased fares could have a negative impact on Sustainable

Development, as people will have fewer transport options. Private
car usage may increase due to fewer public transport services and
increased cost.
Fare increases will impact on low income groups who tend to use
bus services and could lead to transfer payments between fare
paying passengers to concessionary fare groups
45
DRD
Department
Reduction in expenditure on technical advisors
Savings Measure
Spending Area & UoB Transport A0203 Core B0103
Senior Responsible Officer R Downey

Plan
on Delivery Plan

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Admin 0 0 0 0
Resource 1,100 1,740 1,760 1,740
Total 1,100 1,740 1,760 1,740

Provide summary details of the savings measure including supporting evidence for the forecast
level of savings.
This saving relates to a reduction in the requirement for external consultants and the associated costs.

No

Issue reduced allocations April 2011 Reduced External
and Consultancy Fees
subsequent
years

None.
46
of risk of risk
occurring (1-5)*
(1-5)*
No specific risks to identify as this is an
administrative saving
None.

actions.
None.
47
DRD
Department
Savings Measure Release of value from Belfast Harbour

Commissioners
Spending Area & UoB A0208

Plan
on Delivery Plan

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Capital Nil Nil Nil Nil
Resource Nil Nil 15,000 15,000
Total Nil Nil 15,000 15,000

Release of value from Belfast Harbour Commissioners to provide additional funding to DRD.

No
The measure is to be developed so as not to impact adversely on the delivery of Belfast

Harbour Commissioners’ statutory functions.

Date
Officials from DRD and Belfast Harbour Commissioners are
currently scoping options for realising the proposed
revenue.
This is at too early a stage of development to be outlined

specifically.

Too early to say. Potentially new primary legislation will be required, although it can be anticipated
that the administrative resources associated with the development of new legislation would be found
from within existing DRD resources.
48
Probability Impact Contingent Action(s)
of risk of risk
occurring (1-5)*
(1-5)*
Opposition from stakeholders (Harbour 1 3 Full public consultation on the
users) to potential impact on port charges proposal
and services.
Depending on solution adopted, it may be 2 1 Full support to the progress of

necessary to promote new primary the legislation though the
legislation through the Assembly. Assembly’s legislation-
Realisation of the additional revenue would making processes.
therefore be subject to the will of the
Assembly. It may be that the option that
emerges to deliver this additional revenue is
not acceptable to the Assembly.

None.

actions.
No significant impact.
49
Title of Savings Measure
DRD
Department
The Regulator’s assessment of the level of
funding required by NI Water to deliver the
Savings Measure Executive’s priorities and maintain water and
sewerage services.
Spending Area & UoB Water and Sewerage UoB B0113
Senior Responsible Officer G Fair / J Mills

Plan
on Delivery Plan

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Admin 0 0 0 0
Resource 0 6,200 6,200 6,200
Total 0 6,200 6,200 6,200

The Regulator carried out this assessment (Price Control or PC 10) for the period 2010-11 to
2012-13. This was published in February 2010 and will be finally agreed shortly. The £6.2m
saving will be delivered by NIW through its Outputs Monitoring submission and monitored by
the Regulator as part of the PC10 process.

No
The impacts are set out in PC10 Final determination.

Date
PC10 monitoring timetable will apply. This will be agreed
between NI Water and the Utility Regulator (NIAUR).

Fully funded under PC10.
50
of risk of risk
occurring (1-5)*
(1-5)*
These issues are considered in the PC10
Final Determination.

This has not been assessed at this stage

actions.
Equality and Good Relations – Neutral impact
No impact anticipated on sustainable development or social This is one of the

inclusion. considerations included in
PC10 and the Final
Determination. There will be a
positive impact [sections
7.2.4 and 7.6.4].
51
Appendix 2
DEPARTMENT FOR REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT (DRD)

EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT
This is currently being finalised and will be published shortly.
52

Department For Regional Development DRD Draft Budget 2011-2015

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Department For Regional Development DRD Draft Budget 2011-2015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DRAFT BUDGET 2011-15:

SPENDING AND SAVING PROPOSALS WITHIN DEPARTMENT

Savings Delivery Plans 11

Appendix 1 Savings Delivery Plans 13

Appendix 2 Draft Budget 2010 Policy and Equality Impact 52

1. The NI Executive’s ‘Draft Budget Document 2011-15’ was announced on

3. The announcement of the Draft Budget commenced a period of public

4. In parallel DRD is also running a consultation on its own departmental

Telephone: 02890 540848

8. Comments should be sent to arrive no later than 16 February 2011.

9. Individual replies will not be issued to respondents, but a list of

• Objective A - Supporting the economy by planning, developing and

• Objective B - Contributing to the health and well-being of the

Investment in Public Services in 2011-15

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

Total 500.3 487.2 459.6 454.0

Table 2 - Department for Regional Development – Investment

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

Total 438.3 425.3 540.9 558.8

• the A6 Randalstown to Castledawson;

16. In addition there will be significant reductions in other capital improvement

20. On roads, the allocations would allow the Department to begin

• the 85km dual carriageway on the A5 between Derry and Aughnacloy;

25. In addition DRD would be able to plan to invest in a number of sustainable

Water And Sewerage

• 900km of water mains rehabilitation;

• Increased parking charges;

• Savings from Park and Ride through reduced service specification;

Water and Sewerage

• The Regulator’s assessment of the level of funding required by NI

The Department is required to fund cumulative current expenditure reductions

Included in the £517.3m is an allocation of £1.3m for roads and transport

Table 1 – Calculation of Savings Delivery Plan (SDP) Targets

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

The Department is treating these reductions as the overall savings target.

There have already been significant reductions to the Department’s current

• Budget 2004 required the Department to deliver savings of £17.8m /

• Budget 2007 required the delivery of further efficiencies of £22.5m /

• the ‘Review of 2010-11 Spending Plans’ reduced DRD’s current

Significantly though in previous budgets, these savings were mitigated by

Each saving proposal has also been subject to an equality screening to

The Department’s proposed savings are summarised in the following table.

Title of Savings Spending Type of

Concessionary 400 400 400 400

Public Transport 2,000 700 700 700

Dividend from - - 15,000 15,000 Increasing

Sub Total 15,700 32,000 58,400 56,000 162,100

The savings reflect reductions of 3.3% / 5.8% / 11.2% / 12.2% on the

Reclassification from capital to current expenditure

The Department proposes to reclassify £6m of capital to current expenditure

1. Title of Savings Measure

Savings Measure Increased Parking Charges and Penalties

Spending Area & UoB Roads Service A0102

Senior Responsible Officer B Cairns / S Richardson

Date of Latest Version of Delivery 11/01/2011

2. Forecast of Savings Accruing from Savings Measure (£000’s)

3. Summary of Savings Measure.

(2) an increase in the penalty for parking illegally; and

4. Impact on Frontline Services of Savings Measure.

5. Timetable for Actions to Deliver Savings.

Extending on-street P&D. Establishment of a Project Board Mar 2011

Development of parking schemes in each of the 27 towns / Mar 2012

Installation of parking schemes (signs, lines and machines) Oct 2012