Dear Editor,
I have been puzzled by certain pronouncements in the press referencing the chairmen of executive agencies within the public sector.
The Executive Agencies Act 2002 and its companion Regulations of 2010 continue to apply to their operations. Executive agencies differ from statutory bodies and limited liability companies (the predominant organisational forms employed in the public sector for the governance of its enterprises) in certain fundamental respects. The most visible of these is the absence of a board of directors and chairman of the board within executive agencies. The full executive authority and total accountability for the management of these agencies are reposed in the position of the chief executive officer, who reports directly to the responsible minister with whom he or she would have signed a performance agreement.
The Act and Regulations provide that the responsible minister, on the recommendation of the CEO, shall appoint a chairman and members of an advisory board, whose primary functions are “to advise the chief executive officer in the strategic and business planning responsibilities of the executive agency”.
One should note that the CEO is not obliged to accept the advice offered by the chairman and members of the advisory board – a major difference in the long-established governance arrangements of statutory bodies and limited liability companies.
To avoid confusion and misunderstanding about the scope of their authority, I suggest that references in the press and elsewhere to chairmen of such agencies be to their appointed positions as chair of the relevant advisory boards.
Judith Robinson PhD, FCCA
jqr6694@hotmail.com
I have been puzzled by certain pronouncements in the press referencing the chairmen of executive agencies within the public sector.
The Executive Agencies Act 2002 and its companion Regulations of 2010 continue to apply to their operations. Executive agencies differ from statutory bodies and limited liability companies (the predominant organisational forms employed in the public sector for the governance of its enterprises) in certain fundamental respects. The most visible of these is the absence of a board of directors and chairman of the board within executive agencies. The full executive authority and total accountability for the management of these agencies are reposed in the position of the chief executive officer, who reports directly to the responsible minister with whom he or she would have signed a performance agreement.
The Act and Regulations provide that the responsible minister, on the recommendation of the CEO, shall appoint a chairman and members of an advisory board, whose primary functions are “to advise the chief executive officer in the strategic and business planning responsibilities of the executive agency”.
One should note that the CEO is not obliged to accept the advice offered by the chairman and members of the advisory board – a major difference in the long-established governance arrangements of statutory bodies and limited liability companies.
To avoid confusion and misunderstanding about the scope of their authority, I suggest that references in the press and elsewhere to chairmen of such agencies be to their appointed positions as chair of the relevant advisory boards.
Judith Robinson PhD, FCCA
jqr6694@hotmail.com