In their 2021 self-assessment, the Board identified potential for improvement in two areas: understanding of the Board’s role among other agencies (and to some degree among wider stakeholders), and timing of preparation for meetings. The latter was due in large part to the COVID-19 context, where information was constantly being updated. The changing pandemic context presents an opportunity to be more consistent with the timing of content distribution. It also presents an opportunity to shift focus out of the operational level to more strategic and future-oriented issues. The Border Strategy is an example of one such piece of work that has been made possible as COVID pressures on the border ease.
For the former, the status of Customs as the servicing department as well as the predominant delivery vehicle for the shared work programme does present some perception issues in terms of the collective nature of the Board. Having one DCE group that mirrors the Board at the agency level will reinforce a multi-agency approach. The secretariat also has a key role to play here in terms of coordinating and connecting work at the agency level, enabling agencies to deliver on their strengths and core functions.
Although they have been operating successfully already, managing competing priorities across member agencies will be an ongoing challenge for the Board. This includes tensions both between border and non-border work, and between the varied approaches of different border agencies. The IEB model is intended as a mechanism to first surface and then work through these tensions, ensuring that the cross-agency collaboration is adding value for New Zealanders. There may also be some challenges around how less engaged members of the board can be re-engaged.
The Border Executive Board works alongside a range of other sectors and governance boards such as the Security and Intelligence Board, the Hazard Risk Board, the Maritime Security Oversight Committee, Transnational Organised Crime Oversight Committee, All-of-government Supply Chain Group, Economic CEs Group, and the national security system. Greater clarity over how an IEB fits into the wider sector or system it operates in would help avoid overlapping mandates and confusion about responsibilities.
Key challenges remain around the funding of collective arrangements like the Border Executive Board. The Border System Performance appropriation shifted to a club funding model from 1 July 2022. The ability of the border system to create or absorb new initiatives is impacted by the capacity of member agencies’ own funding and workforce situations.
Differences in systems, policies and legislation across agencies also continue to present challenges for collaborative projects. Moving information and people around is possible but not necessarily fast or seamless. Employing and seconding staff comes with difficult and time-consuming on-boarding processes, including meeting the requirements of the servicing department as employer. Collaborating on documents and sharing information is cumbersome in the absence of any cross-agency document management or intranet notice board systems like those internal to individual border agencies.
Another challenge arises specifically for the Border Executive Board due to their focus on governance rather than delivery. Initiatives that have clear cross-agency value but are also heavily operational require careful management, as they are likely to still be delivered through a single agency. For example, the New Zealand Traveller Declaration is a key cross-border function but is run through Customs as a single agency to meet accountability requirements. A governance link is then drawn from Customs back to the Board.
At the most detailed level, there were some pragmatic questions around the branding and identity of the Board (web presence, te reo Māori name, etc.) and unspecified operating procedures such as who answers parliamentary questions directed to the Board that have now been worked through. These could form the basis of more operational guidance to help future IEBs.
The overall success of the Board provides an opportunity to help explore and model solutions for some of these more common collaborative challenges, many of which are already on the radar in the broader public service (e.g. linking up with the Government Chief Digital Officer on investment in common systems). As with any board, success is down to a combination of different factors. In this case, the Border Executive Board has been well-served by a clear purpose, strong operating foundations, and a positive culture of working together.