Success of the 20/30 Year Rule in clearing backlogs of NICS Annual Performance Appraisal Reports

The authority would like to / has responded by post to this request.

Dear Executive Office (Northern Ireland),

Northern Ireland Civil Service problems and delays with both its Annual Performance Appraisal Reporting (APR) System and the linked Promotion System are legendary, running literally decades late.
Because all forms of communication on issues relating to APRs are formally banned in perpetuity , necessary explanations for signatory disowned or apparently fraudulent markings are being, quite officially, delayed and postponed until a time when the 20/30 year rule may become applicable. Meantime of course , on Equality grounds, all legal Promotion competitions have had to be similarly delayed, kept in sync and, quite literally, bedlam has inevitably resulted . Stress and disengagement levels are through the roof, efficiency through the floor.
I write to enquire please if there is any record of the 20/30 year rule being successfully used to secure disclosure of overdue explanations for apparently fraudulent markings. and thus to initiate the task of clearing backlogs?

Yours faithfully,

AIDAN QUINN

Dear Executive Office (Northern Ireland),
H, if there is such a record, there is absolutely no need to wait a statutory month before releasing it.
Just popping me an email would be fine.
Paper copies can follow if broadcasters need them.

Yours faithfully,

AIDAN QUINN

Dear Executive Office (Northern Ireland),
Hi Would it be possible please to have the reply by land mail and on headed paper please?
Good Luck

Yours faithfully,

AIDAN QUINN

Dear Executive Office (Northern Ireland),
Hi, nobody likes to complain or to keep sending endless reminders, nobody likes to criticise, but I still haven’t had a reply of any sort let alone the paper copies that I think we all now accept might be necessary to keep us all right.

We all have to bear in mind that the reputations not just of NICS but of Quoted and Listed Human Resource Outsourcing Companies like Capita for instance are involved. Not just that but pension funds and fund managers too (think Woodford, think the Private Eye stories.)

People going silent when there are long term, (twenty plus year), suspicions of potentially fraudulent or illegal behaviour about, people going to ground, perhaps to avoid incriminating themselves might be understandable on the personal level but this type of behaviour is seldom viewed as a good sign in Market or Investment terms where Openness is highly valued. Nobody of course judges.
Despite Woodford doing his level best recently to prop them up recently , Capita is still off over 82% in the last couple of years and people may be getting restless. We all are.

Nobody, I hope, wants to see this getting to the stage of formal Stock Market Statement territory but there are rules, necessary rules for everybody's protection, that have to be observed.I think we all know that.

Maybe you could please see your way to clarifying the position, if not on the 20/30 Year Rule Question, at least on the timing of Forensic Testing? That simple step could do a lot to set everybody’s mind at rest.

When Communication is forever banned, these things can get out of hand, and Private Eye for instance knows its way around, is seldom effectively silenced.

Nobody pretends these things are easy but, these days, there are Capita shareholders and the entire outsourcing sector to consider. Markets like timeliness, Markets like forensic certainty. Markets don't like reliance on 20/30 year rules for their facts.

It may be traditional in the province, but I think we all know that, outside of NICS, the world doesn't work that way.

Good Luck. I wish you well.

Aidan Quinn

Yours faithfully,

AIDAN QUINN

Looking for an EU Authority?

You can request documents directly from EU Institutions at our sister site AskTheEU.org . Find out more .

AskTheEU.org