Greater clarity on the outcomes expected from State bodies, and how they report on them, would improve corporate governance, the Institute of Directors said today.
In a statement today, the Institute of Directors also called for greater transparency in relation to board appointments.
“If the board of a State body is unclear about the outcomes it is supposed to deliver, and there is no effective means of reporting on these, then no amount of good housekeeping will make up for this deficiency,” said Maura Quinn, CEO of the Institute of Directors, in a statement today.
She welcomed the recently revised Code of Practice for the Governance of State Bodies but added: “What is still missing is a performance framework between the relevant minister and State body which would define the expectations that the government and ministers have of the State body, setting annual and multi-annual targets and the development of key performance indicators to measure their delivery.
"This would allow the agency to report on it performance against these targets and, for state bodies involved in service provision, the development and widespread use of Service Level Agreements should form part of the performance management framework," Ms Quinn said.
"A few characteristics of the system of political appointments to State boards attract ongoing public concern. One of these is that political patronage is a reward for favours rendered, or a method of giving perks to loyal political retainers," she said.
"Another concern is that of excessive closeness between the Minister and his or her nominees, thereby interfering with the proper autonomy in the operation of the state body’s affairs, also known as 'regulation by raised eyebrow'," Ms Quinn said.
She said that since 1990, there has been a 60 per cent increase in the number of State agencies, which now number 600 plus.