Presentation made by Jon Blöndal at the 16th OECD Annual Accruals Symposium held at the OECD Conference Centre on 21-22 March 2016.

1. Public Interest Committee
− the oversight body for IPSASB
Jón Ragnar Blöndal
Co-Chair, Public Interest Committee
Head of Budgeting and Public Expenditures
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
16th Annual Public Sector Accruals Symposium
Paris, 21 March 2016

2. Agenda
• PIC Basic Information
– Background
– Membership
– Modus operandi
– Mandate
• PIC Oversight Activities
– IPSASB/PIC Founding Documents
– Nomination Procedures
– Programme of Work and Budget
– Standard-Setting Due Process
– Consultative Advisory Group (CAG)

3. Basic Information (1)
• Background
– Need for Public Interest Oversight Body (2014)
– Governance Review Group (2015)
– Public Interest Committee
• Membership
– International Monetary Fund
– Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
– World Bank Group
– International Organisation of Supreme Audit Institutions
• Modus operandi
– Decision-Making by Consensus and Collegiate Leadership
– Regular Annual Meeting and Ad hoc Meetings
– Secretariat Provided by Member Institutions

4. Basic Information (2)
• Mandate
– Role is to “Review” and “Advise” IFAC and IPSASB
– Focus on Procedures and Processes; Not Individual and Specific Decisions
– Terms of Reference of the IPSASB
– Nomination and Appointment of IPSASB Members
– Formulation of IPSASB Strategy and Work Plan
– Due Process Employed for Developing Accounting Standards

5. PIC Oversight Activities (1)
• Founding Documents
– Adjusting IPSASB Terms of Reference to Reflect Creation of PIC
– Formulation of a Specific IPSASB/PIC Due Process and Working
Procedures Document
• Nomination and Appointment Procedures
– Profile of IPSASB Members by Gender, Geography and
Professional Background
– Technical Expertise as Main Criteria for Appointment
– Clear Recruitment Strategy to Promote Representativeness

6. PIC Oversight Activities (2)
• Programme of Work and Budget
– “What the IPSASB does is as important as how it conducts its
work.”
– Need for Original Public Sector Specific Standards as
Opposed to Tweaking of Existing IFRS Standards
• Social Benefits = High Priority
• Natural Resources = Emerging
– Long Duration for Developing Standards
• Public Sector Conceptual Framework Now In Place
– Need for Costing Information

7. PIC Oversight Activities (3)
• Standard-Setting Due Process
– Activities of IPSASB in Carrying Out Development of its Standards
– PIC Reviews the Application of Due Process for All New or Revised
IPSASs Before their Release.
– This May Require IPSASB to Take Further Steps to Address
Concerns Regarding the Application of Due Process
• Consultative Advisory Group
– New Body Proposed by IFAC and Recommended by the
Governance Review Group
• Similar Bodies in Place for Other Standard-Setters
– Welcomed by PIC as a “venue for presenting the views of users”
of IPSAS
• Criteria for Members

8. Conclusion
• PIC is Currently Transitioning from the Set-Up /
Establishment Phase to a Regular Operational Phase
• Excellent Quality of Dialogue with IFAC and IPSASB
• Transparency
‒www.oecd.org/gov/budgeting/pic