Refine search Expand filter

Reports

Published

Actions for WestConnex: Assurance to the Government

WestConnex: Assurance to the Government

Transport
Treasury
Premier and Cabinet
Infrastructure
Internal controls and governance
Management and administration
Procurement
Project management
Risk

This audit assesses the assurance provided to the NSW Government for the initial stages of the WestConnex project.

The audit examined the WestConnex project from concept development to the pre-tender phase for Stage 1A – M4 (Parramatta to Homebush Bay). It did not examine the merit of the project or whether it represented value-for-money.

This audit found a number of shortcomings with the governance of the WestConnex project during its early stages and makes recommendations on how to better govern the remainder of the project to minimise the risk of failure.

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #247 - released 18 December 2014

Published

Actions for Volume One 2014 - Areas of focus from 2013

Volume One 2014 - Areas of focus from 2013

Education
Community Services
Finance
Health
Industry
Justice
Local Government
Planning
Premier and Cabinet
Transport
Treasury
Universities
Whole of Government
Environment
Asset valuation
Compliance
Financial reporting
Fraud
Information technology
Internal controls and governance
Procurement
Project management
Risk

Today the Auditor-General of New South Wales, Grant Hehir, released his Volume One Report to Parliament for 2014. The observations included in this report are designed to inform readers of common findings from the 2013 financial and performance audits so agencies and audit committees can use them to identify issues that may be relevant to their organisations.

Published

Actions for Handback of the M4 Tollway

Handback of the M4 Tollway

Transport
Infrastructure
Internal controls and governance
Management and administration
Procurement
Project management

This audit focuses on the M4 handback. It looks at whether the road will be in good condition when the State gets it back, and whether it will cope with the extra traffic after the toll is removed. These are critical issues for taxpayers and motorists. Taxpayers don’t want to be responsible for a large repair bill and motorists don’t want to be stuck in traffic jams.

To ensure that future private sector partnerships (PPP) deal adequately with handback, we recommend that the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA):

  • ensure deeds spell out an appropriate inspection and testing program to determine repairs required to bring roads up to a satisfactory condition at handback (p.11)
  • ensure deeds link condition standards and maintenance approaches to changing industry standards and approaches over the life of the PPP (p.11)
  • consider including in deeds a requirement that operators provide a performance bond or similar security over the cost of handback repairs (p.11)
  • review the lessons learnt from the M4 tollway handback and determine whether it should seek to negotiate changes to existing tollway deeds to better deal with handback, by June 2010 (p.11)

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #193 - released 27 October 2009

Published

Actions for Condition of State Roads

Condition of State Roads

Transport
Infrastructure
Internal controls and governance
Management and administration
Procurement
Project management
Service delivery

The Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) has improved the overall surface condition of State Roads in the last decade. Country road surfaces are now generally much better. Ride quality has improved and cracking has been reduced. The RTA has also achieved a substantial reduction in the number of structurally deficient bridges over the same period. 

Despite a significant increase in the State’s contribution to maintenance since 1999-2000, the RTA has deferred road rebuilding projects. The RTA is rebuilding at less than half its long term target, and has not met this target at any time this decade. The RTA has not identified how it will address deferred rebuilding, although it advises it is developing a new road network management plan which will address this.

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #157 - released 16 August 2006

Published

Actions for The Cross City Tunnel Project

The Cross City Tunnel Project

Transport
Treasury
Premier and Cabinet
Planning
Environment
Infrastructure
Management and administration
Procurement
Project management
Risk

In our opinion the Government’s ‘no net cost to government’ requirement was a legitimate (but not the only possible) basis for the tunnel bid process. The Government was entitled to decide that tunnel users meet the tunnel costs. Structuring the bid process on the basis of an upfront reimbursement of costs incurred (or to be incurred) by the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) was therefore appropriate.

In our opinion, however, the Government, Treasury and the RTA did not sufficiently consider the implications of an upfront payment involving more than simple project cost reimbursement (i.e. the ‘Business Consideration Fee’ component). In addition, the RTA was wrong to change the toll escalation factor late in 2002 to compensate the tunnel operator, Cross City Motorway Pty Ltd, for additional costs.

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #152 - released 31 May 2006

Published

Actions for Planning for road maintenance

Planning for road maintenance

Transport
Infrastructure
Management and administration
Project management

The Audit Office is of the opinion that the RTA is taking positive steps in planning for road maintenance and in many instances follows better practice. There are, however, some important improvements which need to be implemented in order to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of that function.

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #69 - released 1 December 1999

Published

Actions for Review of Eastern Distributor

Review of Eastern Distributor

Transport
Infrastructure
Procurement
Project management

Following a resolution of the Legislative Council, the Audit Office has undertaken a performance audit of the Eastern Distributor. For a number of reasons, The Audit Office is not in the position to determine “whether the proposed toll and concession period represents the best deal”. In part this is the result of time constraints which do not allow a careful analysis of many toll and concession options. Similarly, the audit does not answer “whether the current proposal represents the best environmental outcome”. But each of these issues (toll and concession and environmental consequences) is discussed in the audit report.

The Audit Office recommends that the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA), for any further major project of this type, ensures that it establishes a process which allows all decision makers to have a thorough understanding of the reasonableness of the proponents’ offers and their implications for the State and for the public. The Audit Office also recommends that the RTA should at the outset consult with TCorp in respect of each major project put to tender.

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #42 - released 31 July 1997