Supporting the IEB

The primary source of support for an interdepartmental executive board is its servicing department. The function of servicing departments within the IEB model is to gain efficiencies from established processes and infrastructure instead of creating duplication. This section outlines some of the key functions where the servicing department can provide those efficiencies and reduce the administrative burden on IEB staff.

Each IEB has a servicing department that provides support, often by hosting or supplying IEB staff (the secretariat/IEB unit) and providing corporate services (e.g. IT, HR, finance, legal). Servicing departments are identified in the policy process to set up an IEB and are stated in the Order in Council that formally establishes the IEB. The IEB remains a separate agency from its servicing department and the servicing department is not responsible for the IEB’s key functions.

The specific support arrangements between an IEB and its servicing department would usually be documented in an agreement. The most important arrangements to cover include support with the administration of any appropriations and meeting other financial responsibilities, legislative compliance, and information management; these are discussed in more detail below. The agreement may also outline practical matters such as arrangements for CabNet access (e.g. access provided through the servicing department). This is not an exhaustive list of matters to cover in a servicing department agreement but provides a starting point based on the experience of existing IEBs.

Treasury’s Public Finance Act: Guidance for Specified Agencies (interdepartmental executive boards, interdepartmental ventures and departmental agencies) provides full detail on accountability requirements under the Public Finance Act 1989. Some key features are noted in this section and questions can also be addressed to boardsandventures@treasury.govt.nz.

Like all public service agencies, IEBs are required to provide information on their strategic intentions to their responsible minister within six months of establishment (and then three-yearly), and report on progress against those strategic intentions annually. IEBs may receive a waiver for providing information on their strategic intentions from the Minister of Finance if the minister was satisfied that that information could be covered by the strategic intentions of the servicing department or other agency.

IEBs can manage assets and liabilities and administer their own appropriation.[1] Alternatively, an IEB’s servicing department can administer the appropriation, or the IEB can use an existing appropriation of another department. Regardless of these arrangements, information about the accountability reporting for current IEBs is published on the Treasury website.[2] Whether an IEB should administer its own appropriation or manage assets and liabilities will depend on the size and complexity of the IEB’s activities, as the associated administrative costs may exceed the benefits of separate financial management and reporting. Delegating the day-to-day management of the appropriation to the servicing department can mitigate extra costs involved in the IEB acting as appropriation administrator.

The Treasury can provide advice on these considerations and will also work with Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission, servicing departments, and member agencies to ensure parties are aware of responsibilities and that there is the correct authority to incur expenditure. IEBs may receive a financial statements waiver from the Minister of Finance under some conditions.[3] In these cases, the servicing department and/or other relevant departments will report on the assets, liabilities, revenue, and expenditure of the IEB.

Regardless of specific funding arrangements, in practice, the IEB may delegate administrative tasks (such as the preparation of end-of-year performance reporting documents) to the servicing department, with involvement from the members where appropriate (e.g. signing of the statement of responsibility by all members under section 45CA of the Public Finance Act 1989).

The IEB holds accountabilities under the Public Finance Act 1989 (see above) and the Public Service Act 2020. But in the case of most other public management legislation (e.g. Official Information Act 1982, Public Records Act 2005, Protected Disclosures [Protection of Whistleblowers] Act 2022, and Privacy Act 2020), accountabilities sit with the servicing department. However, the IEB and its staff will need to work with the servicing department to meet these accountabilities given they will need to support compliance (e.g. with record-keeping requirements) and they hold the relevant information about the work of the IEBnecessary for the servicing department to discharge its responsibilities (e.g. responding to OIA requests).

The IEB has flexibility in how they choose to meet their statutory responsibilities and can delegate administrative tasks or functions and powers, either to a servicing department or the chair or director of the IEB [4]. The detail of these arrangements would appropriately be laid out in the IEB’s operating procedures or in the servicing department agreement. Specific statutory responsibilities relating to transparency and employment are discussed elsewhere in this section. Where the IEB seeks to delegate powers conferred on them by either the Public Service Commissioner or a minister, those parties must give prior approval for the respective delegations. For other delegations, the IEB gives ultimate approval and should follow the delegations policy of their servicing department.

The IEB may be required to attend select committees on request, and to help answer parliamentary questions. The appropriate approach to addressing any parliamentary questions should be worked through by the IEB and could be specified in an agreement with the servicing department. The servicing department’s ministerial services team may coordinate the process of collating the required information on behalf of the IEB. If the IEB has delegated management of the day-to-day relationship with their appropriate minister to a director of their secretariat/support unit, that person will likely also have some involvement with the minister’s office.

The servicing department holds ultimate responsibility under the OIA for the compliance of the IEB it services. The appropriate approach to responding to Official Information Act (OIA) requests relating to the work of the IEB should be worked through between the IEB and their servicing department and then set out in the servicing department agreement. Similarly to parliamentary questions, the most pragmatic approach would be to use the servicing department’s existing OIA infrastructure and maintain a connection to the IEB through the secretariat or support unit.

The practicalities of complying with transparency legislation (OIA, public records, etc.) mean that the IEB’s files and information should be kept distinct from those of the servicing department whose information management systems the IEB will most likely be using. In other words, the IEB should have separate folder structures from other business groups hosted on the servicing department’s filing system. This will help the IEB and its servicing department to meet their respective responsibilities under transparency legislation.

An IEB should consider whether and how it should receive advice on risk and assurance. The simplest approach is for risk and assurance matters relating to the IEB to be considered by the risk and assurance committee (RAC) of the servicing department. This is a more streamlined approach than the IEB engaging with individual agency RACs and would be especially appropriate where the servicing department is already handling the financial matters of interest to a RAC on the IEB’s behalf. The Office of the Auditor General (OAG) may also have a role in this matter if they have a view on the audit treatment of IEBs’ annual reports. Like departments, IEBs are subject to review by the ombudsman and select committees, and their annual reports are subject to audit (though may not include separate financial statements if these are included in the annual report of the servicing department).

As IEBs must publish their operating procedures online, they will all need at least some base level of web presence. For some IEBs, a sub-page on an existing agency (e.g. servicing department) website will be sufficient. In other cases, it may be valuable for the specific work programme and purpose of the IEB to develop a separate website and/or branding. If there are branding elements the IEB believes would be of value to them and their work, these should follow all-of-government branding guidelines.

The IEB can appoint staff and is considered the employer of these staff, having been delegated that role by the chief executive of the servicing department, who remains the ‘employer at law.’[5] In practice, this means that both the servicing department and the IEB have some employment responsibilities.

• The IEB is responsible for employment matters at the individual level, such as appointments, removals, employment relationship problems, personal grievances, etc.
• The chief executive of the servicing department is responsible for other generic personnel and employment matters.

For example, the servicing department may support the IEB with consistency of employment agreement terms and conditions and job descriptions to reduce the administrative burden, although that decision would be up to the IEB. The signing out of employment documentation depends on the relevant delegations policy and who the IEB has determined will hold the delegated responsibility for employing staff.

IEBs, their servicing departments, and the staff involved should have clarity over their roles, reporting lines, and the division of any employment responsibilities and this should be documented. A practical approach should be taken to determining which staff are substantively performing the work of the IEB and for which the IEB is therefore the employer. This would include existing employees of the servicing department who are working in IEB roles (i.e. reporting to the IEB or its delegate, and/or seconded to the IEB) and new staff appointed by the IEB. All staff working for the IEB should be doing so on a formal basis. However, where it is practically necessary for staff to work for or with the IEB team on an informal basis (retaining a reporting line outside the IEB), their involvement with the IEB should documented and reviewed regularly to assess any change in circumstances. Employees of the servicing department providing corporate support to the IEB or assisting in IEB work in addition to their substantive roles would most likely not be covered.

As noted in the section on public accountability, IEB activity may be funded via a dedicated appropriation administered by the IEB or its servicing department, which could include funding for any employees. If needed, authority for the servicing department to use the appropriation can be given under administration and use provisions in the Public Finance Act 1989. If the IEB does not have a dedicated appropriation, then employees could be funded from the appropriation used by the servicing department for servicing the IEB and/or could be secondees funded by other IEB member agencies.

[1] Interdepartmental executive boards are treated as departments under section 2 of the Public Finance Act 1989, and can therefore administer appropriations under section 7C.

[2] See www.treasury.govt.nz/information-and-services/state-sector-leadership/interdepartmental-executive-boards.

[3] See sections 45AB and 41(3A) of the Public Finance Act 1989.

[4] Delegation of administrative tasks to the servicing department is allowed under s 27(2) of the Public Service Act 2020. Delegation of functions and powers to individuals can be made under clause 2 in Schedule 6 of the Public Service Act 2020.

[5] These arrangements are set out in sections 68 and 69 of the Public Service Act 2020.