Agencies have managed the planning of outsourcing in a competent way. All agencies satisfactorily managed the contractual aspects of outsourcing. The Audit Office is of the opinion, however, that there is no objective evidence to demonstrate that agencies have achieved their goals in outsourcing IT. Most agencies had identified the current and expected costs and risks of outsourcing. Agencies were not able to demonstrate that the actual costs of outsourcing matched the expected costs.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #103 - released 23 October 2002

The Audit Office is of the opinion that, while agencies are aware of the need to manage risk, their risk management falls short of better practice. Many agencies do not consider their risk management to be adequate. The survey suggests that some agencies, mainly those in the Public Trading Enterprise Sector have approached risk management in a systematic way and in accordance with the principles of better practice standards. Others, mainly departments not subject to commercial imperatives, have yet to progress the management of risk beyond the traditional response of insuring against the more common types of risk. Thus there is a danger that with a number of agencies, risk may not be managed adequately, especially in the General Government Sector.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #98 - released 19 June 2002

State Transit has developed fleet management plans and maintenance standards that meet its regulatory and contractual obligations as a bus operator and are consistent with vehicle manufacturers’ standards and best practice. However, assumptions used in fleet management plans to forecast fleet growth may not result in the most efficient and effective outcome for State Transit. Forecasts fail to take account of opportunities to redesign or reduce services where they exceed contract requirements and are difficult to justify on a commercial basis. Of greater concern are the consequences arising from bus maintenance practices not meeting State Transit’s own standards.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #97 - released 29 May 2002

The Audit Office is of the opinion that while planning, surveillance and response issues remain unresolved, the State is at significant risk from large-scale emergencies such as might occur with foot-and-mouth disease. Actions by NSW Agriculture since the Newcastle disease emergency at Mangrove Mountain in 1999 have positioned the State to manage better emergency animal diseases. Many of these actions have been pursued within the context of national agreements and programs.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #96 - released 8 May 2002

The Audit Office is of the opinion that:

• the sale was delivered with reasonable efficiency and effectiveness

• the sale yielded a satisfactory return to the NSW Government. The possibility for a higher return was limited to about 2% to 4% on gross proceeds of $936m. It would have required setting a higher share price for all investors and adopting a more flexible approach to share allocation

• the Government’s objective to promote community and investor support was achieved. The scale of the demand for script added to costs and was not fully translated into higher proceeds  

• generally satisfactory accountability frameworks were put in place for the sale and no probity concerns were identified

• the frameworks to achieve the Government’s wider reforms of the racing and wagering industries have substantially been implemented.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #61 - released 23 December 1998

Guidelines for staff are available for each of the three schemes, but they do not yet provide staff with sufficient information on how to attract proposals, undertake assessments, negotiate agreements and monitor assistance. Some training of staff responsible for assessing proposals, negotiating agreements and monitoring outcomes has been provided, but needs to be enhanced. In particular, The Audit Office believes that there is insufficient guidance for staff in undertaking economic assessment of proposals. 

There is a prevailing view amongst Department of State and Regional Development staff that guidelines are just that, and need not be followed. It was apparent, however, that assumptions made in assessments were not always appropriate and may lead to poor decisions. Flexibility need not be impaired by requiring greater adherence to guidelines. This would help ensure minimum standards of process and rigour in all cases.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #60 - released 21 December 1998

At the request of the Department of Gaming and Racing, the audit reviewed the efficiency and effectiveness of the organisation and management of casino surveillance undertaken pursuant to the Casino Control Act, 1992 (the Act).

Implicitly the Act requires an effective level of cooperation and coordination between the agencies to achieve their statutory roles and responsibilities. However, The Audit Office is of the opinion that this has not been achieved. As a consequence, the efficiency and effectiveness of the surveillance roles and processes carried out under the Act can be improved.

Revision is required to the surveillance methodology and its implementation, to the skills base within Director of Casino Surveillance (DCS) and the underlying working and to organisational arrangements between and within DCS and the New South Wales Casino Control Authority. Until such revision has been finalised, it is not possible to determine the level of resources or type of surveillance that needs to be undertaken and funded.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #50 - released 10 June 1998

In most organisations with a board or committee, there was confusion about the respective roles, powers, responsibilities and accountabilities of the Minister/s, the board and the Chief Executive Officer (CEO). There are a wide variety of governance arrangements in operation across the spectrum of boards and committees. This is partly due to differing arrangements set out in relevant legislation and gaps in legislative detail which have been addressed in a variety of ways.

Under current arrangements, governing boards of SOCs have accountabilities to Shareholding Ministers and Portfolio Ministers, as well as to Ministers who are responsible for industry-wide regulation. Non-corporatised Government businesses have different accountability and control arrangements. The large number of statutory and nonstatutory bodies and authorities have a wide array of governance arrangements. As a result of uncertainty and confusion on governance aspects, The Audit Office observed that many governing boards operate as high level advisory management committees. The audit also found that board and committee practices fell short of standards expected in a professional boardroom culture.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #49 - released 7 April 1998