An Examination of the System of Public Appointments in Northern Ireland

Author(s): Ann Marie Gray, Deirdre Heenan and Wendy Cousins
Document Type: Report
Year: 1998
Publisher: University of Ulster
Place of Publication: Jordanstown
Subject Area(s): Politics
Client Group(s) : Employers

Abbreviations: NI - Northern Ireland, NDPB - Non Departmental Public Bodies

Background to the Research

  • In 1994, as part of a wider project on women and politics managed by the Centre for Research on Women, Ann Marie Gray and Deirdre Heenan agreed to undertake an examination of the role of women in public bodies in NI. During this initial piece of research the researchers became acutely aware of the dearth of data available on the subject. What little information was available was sketchy and vague.
  • The article which resulted from this initial research argued that the composition of public bodies should be the subject of in-depth research, as any discussion on the future role of public bodies in NI was seriously limited by the lack of detailed research.
  • In this context the stated purpose of the research was to provide hithero unavailable qualitative and quantitative data on the appointments process and endeavour to recommend ways in which the system could be improved. It was felt that this research would contribute to the knowledge and understanding of the public apointments system in NI and make a significant contribution to the wider debate about the use of public bodies. The study covers a period of time before, during and after the introduction of a new code of practice for public appointments. It was agreed that the study would meet a number of objectives.
  • These were:
    • To collect data on exisiting membership of public bodies, looking particularly at the background, career history and experience of those serving on public bodies.
    • To explore the nomination and appointment process in order to enhance understanding of the existing system, to determine the rate of recruitment and consider the process of self-nomination.
    • To consider the issue of diversity in public appointments with particular reference to age, gender, class, religion and geographical location.
    • To examine and draw on models of good practice in other countries.

Research Approach

  • There were three main stages in the study:
  • Stage 1 - A postal survey of all members of executive and advisory NDPBs was undertaken in the summer of 1996. Of the 2,199 questionnaires distributed, 963 useable questionnaires were returned within the deadline. This represented 1,164 different public appointments, giving a 53% response rate.
  • Stage 2 - The second stage of the research was to build on preliminary research findings. It was to centre on an exploration of existing recruitment procedures and suggest ways in which the process could be improved. It was envisaged that this would involve interviews with a variety of nominating groups such as the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, Confederation of British Industry, and district councils. It would also look at the policy of the Central Secretriat and the individual government departments in relation to appointments.
  • Stage 3 - The final stage of the project was planned to introduce a comparative aspect to the work based on library based research and discussions with researchers working in the same field in other countries. It was hoped that this comparative stage would enable suggestions for good practice to be made. It was anticipated that there would be a good deal of comparable international research to draw upon, unfortunately, the reality was somewhat different and it emerged that a relatively small number of researchers are actually working in this area.

Main Findings

  • This research highlighted a number of issues relating to public appointments in NI:
    • The under-representation of women, younger people, ethnic minorities, people with disabilities, and Catholics;
    • That members are drawn from a narrow socio-economic band;
    • That a significant number of members had a long tradition of serving on NDPBs;
    • That confusion remains over the process of nomination and appointment and the criteria on which decisions are made;
    • A perceived lack of accountability in relation to NDPBs;
    • Problems with the complaints procedure introduced by the Commissioner for Public Appointments;
    • Difficulties of balancing a public appointment with being a full-time employee;
    • The lack of adequate and appropriate induction and training.

Recommendations

  • Representation - Pro-active measures do need to be developed to broaden representation on NDPBs. The substantial under-representation of younger people (under 45) is of particular concern and clear initiatives are required in this area.
  • Transparency and Openness - It is suggested that information currently provided on NI NDPBs in the Cabinent Office publication public bodies should be summarised and made widely available to the NI public.
  • It is suggested that details of membership of public bodies should be freely available (except in exceptional circumstances) and that consideration should also be given to the use of information technology such as the internet.
  • Accountability - NDPBs could consider having some (or more) meetings open to the public, with adequate notice prior to meetings and meetings held in accessible venues. Annual reports should be written in plain English and contain details of objectives set and achieved, targets and future plans.
  • Members of the public should have opportunities to respond to reports. Annual reports should be readily available, particularly for bodies responsible for service provision.
  • Process of Appointment - It is recommended that prospective appointees should be provided with clear, comprehensive information about the appointment and what it entails. It should be the responsibility of departments to ensure that boards do this. It is also crucial that nominations are handled in a sensitive way.
  • Appraisal - It is important that there is a process through which the contributions of members can be appraised and they can obtain some feedback. This points to the need for broad guidelines to be introduced and for clear information on appraisal to be available to members if they are dissatisfied with appraisals.
  • Training - Departments should be responsible for ensuring that new members receive general all purpose training as well as 'in-service' training to inform serving members of new issues and to update and improve their skills.
  • Some thought should be given to the benefits of introducing mentoring programmes, in which more experienced members are responsible for looking after new members for at least the first year of their appointment.
  • Expenses/Payment - At the outset members should be informed about the level of expenses and procedures for claiming expenses. For a number of NDPBs, the system for claiming expenses needs to be streamlined and expenses reimbursed more promptly.
  • Employers and Public Appointments - It is recommended that the Central Appointments Unit improves communication with employers on the subject of employees and public appointments.
  • Advertising - It is recommended that notices seeking nomination for public appointments should be more visible. The use of broadcast media, especially local radio should also be encouraged.
  • Advertisments should not be the only route to appointment. It is, howwever, vital that the process of public appointment is not seen as a two or three track system with one track being more likely to lead to appointment.
  • Role of Central Appointment Unit - The Central Appointment Unit should continue to have overall responsibility for the process of public appointments. It should ensure that recommendations are implemented, have responsibility for setting targets, reviewing initiatives and overseeing departmental progress.

 

Home | About ORB | Contact


Disclaimer: © ORB 2001Monday, 28-Jul-2003 15:15