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

All agencies in the NSW Premier and Cabinet cluster received unqualified audit opinions for the year ended 30 June 2014. Overall financial reporting has improved. Agencies submitted their financial statements earlier than last year and for the third year in a row there has been a reduction in the number of misstatements identified during audits.

For the second consecutive year, the General Government and Total State Sector Accounts received an unqualified auditor’s opinion following more than a decade of qualifications. The quality and timeliness of financial reporting across the NSW public sector has continued to improve. Compared to previous years, there were fewer errors in agencies’ 2013–14 financial statements submitted for audit and used for whole-of-government financial reporting.

New South Wales Members of Parliament, when spending their additional entitlements, substantially complied with the Parliamentary Remuneration Tribunal’s Determination for the year-ended 30 June 2013.

The NSW public university sector is in a good financial position with the combined operating margin improving to 6.6 per cent in 2013 up from 4.9 per cent in 2012.

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.

The following report assessed the activities of the two agencies in relation to their government advertising campaigns in 2012-13 and tested compliance by tracking a campaign through from development to dissemination.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #236 - released 23 September 2013

The NSW Government does not estimate or report the total cost of alcohol abuse. The Audit Office of New South Wales’ sponsored research estimates it costs the government over $1 billion a year, or around $416 from each NSW household.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #235 - released 6 August 2013

Except for the matters noted, the Members we reviewed substantially complied with the requirements of the Parliamentary Remuneration Tribunal’s Determination (the PRT Determination) for the year ended 30 June 2012.

The review identified the following material exceptions:

• nine Member claims were not submitted for payment within 60 days of receipt or occurrence of the expense 
• eight Members did not return their unspent Sydney Allowance amounts by 30 September 2012
• sixteen Members did not complete an annual declaration stating the benefits accrued by way of loyalty/incentive schemes, as a consequence of using their allowance and entitlements, were used only for Parliamentary duties and not for private purposes.

There are inherent limitations in undertaking an engagement of this nature. The work was conducted as a review engagement, not an audit. Consequently, the procedures were not designed to detect all instances of non-compliance. The review provides limited assurance and expresses our conclusion about whether the Members reviewed complied with the PRT Determination’s requirements for Member entitlements.

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