The report focuses on the Department of Primary Industries’ (DPI) as the lead agency for biosecurity in New South Wales. It examines how well the department responds to biosecurity emergencies and manages compliance activities. DPI’s state partners include NSW Health, the NSW Environment Protection Authority, Local Land Services, and Local Control Authorities to manage biosecurity risks in New South Wales.

Biosecurity is the protection of the economy, environment, and community from the negative impacts of pests, diseases, weeds, and contaminants.

National and State governments have defined roles and responsibilities for biosecurity in Australia, reflecting the allocation of powers in the Australian Constitution. The Australian Government has direct responsibility for biosecurity (quarantine) at the international border, and works jointly with the states and territories to set the legislative framework and policy direction for managing biosecurity nationally. It also works with state and territory governments to ensure there is a national approach to biosecurity. State governments manage their biosecurity activities within the national framework.

The Department of Primary Industries (DPI), within the Department of Industry, is the lead agency for biosecurity in NSW. This audit was conducted with the Department of Industry as the auditee. On 2 April 2019 the NSW Government announced it will abolish the Department of Industry. From 1 July 2019 the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment, will have responsibility for biosecurity activities described in this report.

The NSW Biosecurity Strategy 2013–2021 (the Strategy) articulates the NSW Government’s responsibilities for biosecurity within the national legislative framework. Achieving the outcomes of the strategy relies on DPI fulfilling two key responsibilities. Firstly, undertaking direct actions, such as implementing strong regulatory compliance and licensing activities, and managing biosecurity emergency responses. Secondly, leading the response to biosecurity risks by fostering effective collaboration with stakeholders across government, industry, and the wider community.

In NSW, 11 regional Local Land Services (LLS) are the key partners for DPI in meeting its biosecurity responsibilities. Each LLS develops and implements strategies to manage invasive pests and diseases within their regions. They also investigate new reports of pests or diseases in their regions and staff local emergency control centres when an emergency response is triggered.

Local Control Authorities (LCAs) also have a role in biosecurity management. LCAs include local councils and a small number of specialist regional agencies. Their role focuses on strategies to manage weeds within their local areas.

This audit assessed the effectiveness and economy of DPI’s biosecurity emergency response and prevention activities. It looks at DPI’s emergency response practice and its compliance program as a key prevention activity for which DPI has primary responsibility. DPI sets policy and procedural compliance standards for management of biosecurity risks in NSW and also conducts an annual program of property inspections and investigations that ensure that its compliance policies and procedures are being applied effectively.

Appendix one - Response from agency

Appendix two - Location of selected biosecurity emergency responses

Appendix three - About the audit

Appendix four - Performance auditing

Parliamentary Reference: Report number #321 - released 18 June 2019

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.

Banner image: ‘Yellow crazy ant’, supplied and permitted for use by NSW Department of Primary Industries under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported Licence. Full terms.

We found that Forests NSW has adequate estimates of how much timber is available from native forests, now and into the future. It uses an industry accepted process to develop estimates, but more could be done to improve reliability. For instance, yield estimates for the South coast, Eden and Tumut are well overdue for review.

We also found that Forests NSW should have sufficient timber to meet its wood supply commitments which are fixed for periods up to 2023 using both native and plantation hardwood. However, the cost and difficulty of harvesting and hauling this timber is likely to increase over time. This presents a significant challenge for Forests NSW to manage.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #185 - released 29 April 2009

The Audit Office’s performance audit report, The Management of Intellectual Property (October 2001) addressed issues at the whole-of-government level and examined IP management in fourteen agencies.

This Better Practice Guide draws on the audit report and seeks to build upon initiatives undertaken by the Premier’s Department and other agencies. Some of these initiatives are included under the heading of ‘Additional Information’ at the end of the guide. These should be consulted for help in formulating policies and procedures for the management of Intellectual Property.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #90 - released 17 October 2001

The Audit Office is of the opinion that the good management of Intellectual Property (IP) by the public sector depends on an adequate and coordinated framework to guide agencies in developing their own policies. The current framework for IP is incomplete because it does not help agencies to develop policy, identify the IP assets that need to be managed, integrate management of IP with agency objectives, access expert help when they need it, encourage staff to be innovative and so create and promote the uptake of IP or monitor and defend IP against unauthorised use.

It is also important to improve coordination between agencies responsible for developing whole-of-government policy in regard to IP. The lack of an integrated framework and co-ordinated support for agencies means that the management of IP has varied across the public sector and in general is not adequate.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #89 - released 17 October 2001

The purpose of this document is to assist agencies in meeting the challenges of exploiting the benefits and managing the risks which e-government presents. Being 'e-ready' and managing the transition to e-government will not happen by chance. It is difficult and requires a careful and concerted effort. This guide draws from the research assembled in the performance audit, e-government - Use of the Internet and related technologies to improve public sector performance (September 2001). It addresses issues at the agency level, in a self-help guide format.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #88 - released 19 September 2001

Notwithstanding the considerable effort, it is not apparent that the Government's vision can be fully achieved without increased efforts. Based on the current position, to ensure that the Government's vision can be achieved the Audit Office is of the view that the following key issues need to be urgently addressed: 

• more robust mechanisms are needed to monitor, review and report publicly on progress and benefits

• a greater emphasis should be placed on central coordination to ensure that agencies act in a more uniform and integrated manner  

• the achievement of significant reform of business processes will require a substantial strengthening of accountability mechanisms and more comprehensive, rigorous and systematic approaches to e-government project and risk management. 

• despite an array of guidance material and support provided by central agencies, line agency needs for assistance do not seem to be being met to sufficiently advance matters across the sector at the pace and scope desired

• the Government’s e-government aspirations and funding are not always effectively harmonised. Agencies typically have limited resources available to trial or experience new technologies, and display an aversion to the associated risks.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #87 - released 19 September 2001

The Audit Office observed that there is diversity in the form, content and quality of reports produced by the agencies. This reflects, in the main, that agencies tailor reports to meet local needs and conditions. It is considered that improvement is needed. A more consistent approach to financial reporting through the use of minimum standards is suggested. The Audit Office is of the view that agencies would benefit from a systematic approach to the reporting of outputs and outcomes and using financial and non-financial information to measure, monitor and thereby improve performance.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #85 - released 27 June 2001

The Audit Office recognises that TAFE NSW has undergone significant change in the last decade in order to improve service delivery. Whilst the focus of change has been TAFE NSW's core educational role, administration has also benefited. The Quality Management Systems introduced by the Institutes are an example.

The Audit Office is of the opinion that TAFE NSW needs a means by which the efficiency and effectiveness of administrative functions can be assessed notwithstanding initiatives by certain Institutes to introduce monitoring, benchmarking and reporting of administration. In the interests of accountability, TAFE NSW requires the establishment of a common performance reporting framework for administration in each Institute and across Institutes. Along with other key result areas of TAFE NSW’s operations, a reporting framework would better able the TAFE Commission Board (the Board) to inform the Minister for Education, in compliance with the Act, of the efficiency and effectiveness of the administrative functions.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #79 - released 6 February 2001