Reports
Actions for Volume Five 2015 Premier and Cabinet
Volume Five 2015 Premier and Cabinet
Volume Five 2015 covered Premier and Cabinet agencies such as the Department of Premier and Cabinet, Office of Sport, Venues NSW, Barangaroo Delivery Authority and Infrastructure NSW.
Actions for Volume Four 2015 Treasury and State Finances
Volume Four 2015 Treasury and State Finances
For the third consecutive year, the General Government and Total State Sector Accounts received an unqualified auditor’s opinion following more than a decade of qualifications.
Errors in agencies’ financial statements and the Total State Sector Accounts were corrected as necessary to ensure compliance with Australian Accounting Standards and the requirements of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983.
Improvements to year-end financial reporting processes have enabled the Audit Office to issue 229 audit opinions by 2 October 2015, compared to only 67 by the same time in 2011.
Actions for Government advertising 2015
Government advertising 2015
The Government Advertising Act 2011 requires the Auditor-General to conduct an annual performance audit to check NSW Government agency compliance with the Act.
This audit focused on the Department of Premier and Cabinet’s (DPC) role in monitoring government agencies compliance with government advertising requirements, and examined advertising campaigns run by Destination NSW and the Sydney Opera House.
Parliamentary reference - Report number #253 - released 22 June 2015
Actions for Large construction projects
Large construction projects
The independent assurance given to the NSW Government and sponsor agencies on the viability of large capital projects throughout their lifecycle is inadequate. Government policy is regularly not followed and not properly communicated to those responsible for implementing such policy.
This audit sought to test the effectiveness of the NSW capital project assurance system - which includes gateway reviews and reporting - but significant levels of non-compliance identified in our case studies prevented this. The NSW Commission of Audit also identified this issue in 2012. Gateway reviews are conducted by independent reviewers at key stages of a project’s life cycle and provide an independent assessment on a project’s readiness to proceed to the next stage.
Parliamentary reference - Report number #252 - released 7 May 2015
Actions for Areas of focus from 2014
Areas of focus from 2014
Actions for Relocating Agencies to Regional Areas
Relocating Agencies to Regional Areas
Decisions to relocate government agencies to non-metropolitan areas are not made purely for cost reasons. They can also serve government policy objectives, such as promoting regional economic development.
Regardless of the policy objectives that may exist, I would expect that decisions on individual agency relocations would be based on sound business cases. Those business cases would show how the relocation achieves any relevant government objectives, what costs (or savings) would be involved, logistical considerations such as obtaining appropriate accommodation and staff, and any impacts on levels service to the public.
In my view, the existence of government policy objectives does not remove the need for individual decisions to be made in a transparent, rational and accountable manner. Responsible public servants should provide the appropriate information to government to allow it to judge how best to implement its policies.
Parliamentary reference - Report number #147 - released 14 December 2005
Actions for In-year Monitoring of the State Budget
In-year Monitoring of the State Budget
The annual Budget is one of the most important and visible statements about a government’s financial intentions.
Once a Budget is released, it is important to monitor variations from the projections it contains. This is done for two reasons -
- first, to ensure that individual agencies are properly managing their budget allocations and that any genuine emerging need for additional funding is met.
- second, to ensure that any changes to the State’s overall financial position are understood and corrective action is undertaken.
This audit dealt primarily with the second of these objectives.
Budget monitoring involves both agencies and Treasury working together to quickly identify factors that might impact the budget, to clearly understand the implications for their budget position and to take any remedial action needed.
Poor monitoring may reduce the confidence that stakeholders have in the government’s financial management. It may mean that government decisions made in- year or for the following budget (for example on tax measures or spending increases/savings) are based on an incorrect understanding of the State’s true financial position.
I hope that this Report provides some useful insights that will assist in better monitoring.
Parliamentary reference - Report number #141 - released 28 July 2005