Reports
Addressing public inquiry recommendations - Emergency response agencies
The Auditor-General for New South Wales, Margaret Crawford, released a report today examining how effectively NSW emergency response agencies address public inquiry recommendations.
The audit found that agencies’ governance arrangements to address public inquiry recommendations have important and consistent gaps.
The agencies did not sufficiently verify that they had implemented accepted recommendations as intended, and in line with the outcomes sought. This creates a risk that issues with disaster prevention or responses highlighted by public inquiries are not addressed in a complete or timely way and may persist or recur in the future.
The audit also found that agencies did not always nominate milestone dates or priority rankings for accepted recommendations, and so could not demonstrate they were managing or monitoring them effectively.
The audit examined how five emergency response agencies – Fire and Rescue NSW, National Parks and Wildlife Service, NSW Rural Fire Service, NSW State Emergency Service and Resilience NSW – have addressed accepted recommendations from public inquiries over the last ten years. The audit assessed the effectiveness of governance arrangements to track recommendation implementation.
The report makes six recommendations to improve disaster response agency arrangements to address public inquiry recommendations.
While the focus of this audit was agencies that responded to natural disasters, the findings and recommendations from this report have the potential to be applied across the NSW public sector in response to public inquiries related to other areas of government activity.
Major disasters and emergencies often trigger public post-event inquiries and reviews. The purpose of these reviews is to identify the causes of disaster or emergency events and areas for future improvement in prevention, preparedness, response and recovery. Areas identified for future improvement are then the subject of recommendations to government or government agencies and, when accepted, become public commitments to action.
Responses to the bushfires of 2019–20 followed this pattern, producing both NSW and Australian Government commissioned inquiries: the NSW Bushfire Inquiry and the Royal Commission into National Natural Disaster Arrangements. Both highlighted the significant volume of inquiries in recent years. Both asked whether agency responses to previous inquiries were improving Australia's capacity to prevent, prepare for, respond to and recover from natural disasters. The inquiries reflected on the difficulty of answering this question due to insufficient clarity and transparency on whether the improvements and risks that inquiries identified have been addressed in practice.
This audit stems from similar questions about how effectively government agencies in NSW are delivering on public inquiry recommendations. It assessed how five emergency response agencies have addressed accepted recommendations from 17 public inquiries over the last ten years. For this audit, we considered inquiries and reviews that affected agencies' operational capacity to respond to and recover from bushfire, floods and storms. The in scope public inquiries for this audit relate to:
- the 2013–14, the 2016–17 and the 2017–18 bushfire seasons
- severe storms and floods in 2015, 2016 and 2017
- workforce issues affecting the ability of agencies to respond to natural disasters.
The public inquiries we reviewed included coronial inquiries and inquests, parliamentary inquiries, independent reports and reviews, performance audits and recovery coordinator reports. In total, we looked at the processes that agencies used to implement 191 recommendations from these 17 public inquiries.
The objective of this audit was to determine how effective emergency response agencies are in addressing accepted recommendations from public inquiries. To answer our audit objective, we asked two questions:
- Do agencies have effective governance arrangements in place to respond to, monitor and implement accepted recommendations from public reviews and inquiries?
- Do agencies provide timely and accurate information on the implementation of accepted inquiry recommendations to senior decision makers and the public?
The agencies reviewed were:
- Fire and Rescue NSW
- NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (now a division of the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment)
- NSW Rural Fire Service
- NSW State Emergency Service
- Resilience NSW (formerly the Ministry for Police and Emergency Services; and the Office of Emergency Management).
While the focus of this audit was agencies that respond to natural disasters (flood, bushfire and storms), the findings and recommendations from this report have the potential to be applied across the NSW public sector in response to public inquiries related to other areas of government activity.
Conclusion
The arrangements used by NSW emergency response agencies to address public inquiry recommendations have important and consistent gaps.
For two-thirds of the recommendations reviewed as part of this audit, the agencies did not sufficiently verify that they had been implemented as intended, and in line with the outcomes sought. This exposes risks that gaps in disaster responses are not addressed in a complete or timely way and persist or recur in the future.
Two-thirds of the recommendations reviewed as part of this audit had also not been allocated milestone dates or priority rankings, and as such the audited agencies are less accountable and could not demonstrate they were managing or monitoring them effectively.
None of the agencies publicly report the status of actions taken to address public inquiry recommendations, limiting accountability and transparency.
The agencies subject to this audit all address accepted recommendations from public inquiries with varying degrees of formality and transparency. No agency maintained a central and comprehensive approach – such as a register – to track recommendations for all public inquiries.
The agencies do not consistently review evidence that recommendations have been implemented effectively, and in line with the intention of the inquiry. The agencies also often failed to set milestone dates or test that recommendations had been actioned as committed. This increases the risk that recommendations are overlooked or not addressed in line with the intent, priority and risk of the recommendation. In turn, this raises the possibility that gaps and issues identified by public inquiries are not adequately resolved and could persist or recur in future disasters.
None of the audited agencies published a summary of progress made in implementing accepted recommendations to update the public. There are transparency and accountability benefits in doing so. This echoes the findings of the NSW Bushfire Inquiry and the Royal Commission into National Natural Disaster Arrangements. Both inquiries noted that it is difficult, and sometimes impossible, to determine the implementation status for many recommendations by publicly available information.
One factor hindering agencies from publishing this information is the lack of a consistent means of tracking public inquiry recommendation implementation. Adopting a consistent approach, within and across agencies, should help to overcome this barrier in the future.
This chapter reviews the way agencies have responded to, monitored and ensured they have implemented accepted recommendations from public inquiries.
This chapter reviews how agencies provided information to senior decision makers, agency Audit and Risk Committees and the public on the implementation of accepted recommendations from public inquiries.
Appendix one – Response from agencies
Appendix two – Identifying in scope inquiries
Appendix three – In scope inquiries
Appendix four – Recommendations reported by agencies as still in progress (detail)
Appendix five – Agency reported recommendation implementation status (unaudited)
Appendix six – About the audit
Appendix seven – Performance auditing
Copyright Notice
© Copyright reserved by the Audit Office of New South Wales. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without prior consent of the Audit Office of New South Wales. The Audit Office does not accept responsibility for loss or damage suffered by any person acting on or refraining from action as a result of any of this material.
Parliamentary reference - Report number #348 - released (22 April 2021).
