Reports
Actions for Volume One 2013 focusing on themes from 2012
Volume One 2013 focusing on themes from 2012
This overview summarises the significant findings included in my 2012 financial audit report, volumes three to eleven, and highlights NSW agencies’ overall achievements and challenges. The overview summarises key themes and messages arising from these audits to help readers understand common findings. Agencies and their audit and risk committees can use the overview to self-assess and identify issues that may be relevant to their organisations.
It found more than 85 per cent of the recommendations in my 2011 financial audit reports to Parliament were implemented in 2012. Whilst this is less than 100 per cent, NSW government agencies clearly acted on my significant recommendations. However, NSW government agencies need to do more to follow up more detailed recommendations that are made directly to management.
Actions for Fraud control improvement kit: Meeting your fraud control obligations
Fraud control improvement kit: Meeting your fraud control obligations
Fraud risks, and fraud control obligations, are growing at a rate which demands that more be done. Our 2005 report showed that still only 50 per cent of NSW public sector organisations had achieved an adequate level of performance in developing and implementing a fraud control strategy. In response to this, our 2005 report provided a range of recommendations for improving fraud control and urged that fraud control become a key item for attention by audit committees.
We recognise that organisations need a simple and effective way to review and monitor how effectively they are implementing fraud control strategies. This kit has been developed for precisely that purpose. Its development reflects an extended period of consultation, focus-group review and pilot-testing to ensure that that the kit is simple to use, practical and flexible. The kit assists organisations to meet their fraud control obligations in a cost-effective manner, tailored to their situation and based on risk.
Parliamentary reference - Report number #156 - released 20 July 2006
Actions for The Cross City Tunnel Project
The Cross City Tunnel Project
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