Member's statement: Civil Service: Northern Ireland Audit Office Report
Member's statement by Ms Diane Forsythe on .
- MLA
- Ms Diane Forsythe
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 27 January 2026
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Civil Service: Northern Ireland Audit Office Report
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5344970
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Today, we have seen the publication of the Northern Ireland Audit Office report 'Leading and Resourcing the Northern Ireland Civil Service', and it is damning. We speak a lot here about the pressures that public services and finances are under, and I consistently highlight the need to deliver efficiencies and manage services better through transformation. Many hard-working individuals contribute substantially to the Northern Ireland Civil Service daily, but, with more than 24,500 staff, they and the structures need to be managed and coordinated better. With millions of pounds invested in shared services, the management of Northern Ireland Civil Service staffing and HR lies with the Minister of Finance, John O'Dowd, and today's Audit Office report sets out clearly his failings to take action and get a grip on the situation. Where is the ambition from the Minister to wage war on the waste in government? When publishing his multi-year Budget plans, the Minister said that he was in listening mode. I hope that he is listening to the Comptroller and Auditor General and the report, which clearly identifies areas in which he has failed to act. The report follows up the 2020 Audit Office report 'Capacity and Capability in the Northern Ireland Civil Service' and a subsequent report by the Public Accounts Committee. Five years have passed, and only five of the 23 recommendations made by the Audit Office in 2020 have been achieved, while just five of the 12 PAC recommendations have been delivered. The same issues are still being reported; in many cases, they are worse. We see a greater reliance on temporary staffing solutions in the Civil Service, with nearly 5,000 agency workers employed in 2025, more than double the number recorded in 2019. What has John O'Dowd done to tackle the soaring cost of agency staff? It sits now at over half a billion pounds. What has the Finance Minister done to tackle sick leave in the Civil Service? It cost £48·8 million in 2024-25 and has been steadily increasing, with an average of 13·4 staff days lost in 2024-25 compared with 12·6 in 2018-19. The Civil Service declared nearly 5,500 vacant posts on 31 March 2025. In addition, over 3,000 staff were temporarily promoted, which represents 13% of the workforce. The report has found a lack of progress in key strategic areas. It notes concerns about the reliability of data and highlights a failure to see action on previous recommendations. Surely, with proper workforce planning, those costs can be driven down. John O'Dowd needs to take action to deliver efficiency. The question is this: is he really in listening mode?
435 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.93).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.93 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.91 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.09 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:21 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.