Refine search Expand filter

Reports

Published

Actions for WestConnex: Assurance to the Government

WestConnex: Assurance to the Government

Transport
Treasury
Premier and Cabinet
Infrastructure
Internal controls and governance
Management and administration
Procurement
Project management
Risk

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

Published

Actions for Volume Ten 2014 Focusing on Treasury and Finance (including Superannuation and Insurance)

Volume Ten 2014 Focusing on Treasury and Finance (including Superannuation and Insurance)

Treasury
Finance
Asset valuation
Compliance
Financial reporting
Fraud
Information technology
Internal controls and governance
Procurement
Project management

The quality of financial reporting in the Finance and Treasury cluster continues to improve with fewer reported misstatements over the last three years. The financial statements of all cluster agencies received unqualified audit opinions, except for the New South Wales Self Insurance Corporation.

Published

Actions for Use of Purchasing Cards and Electronic Payment Methods

Use of Purchasing Cards and Electronic Payment Methods

Treasury
Compliance
Fraud
Procurement

NSW government agencies are not making sufficient use of purchasing cards and EFTs to pay for goods and services. There are potential savings in processing costs of around $22 per transaction from purchasing cards and over $7 when using EFTs instead of cheques.

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #243 - released 5 June 2014

Published

Actions for Volume One 2014 - Areas of focus from 2013

Volume One 2014 - Areas of focus from 2013

Education
Community Services
Finance
Health
Industry
Justice
Local Government
Planning
Premier and Cabinet
Transport
Treasury
Universities
Whole of Government
Environment
Asset valuation
Compliance
Financial reporting
Fraud
Information technology
Internal controls and governance
Procurement
Project management
Risk

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.

Published

Actions for Liverpool to Parramatta Bus Transitway

Liverpool to Parramatta Bus Transitway

Transport
Treasury
Infrastructure
Management and administration
Project management
Service delivery

Several of my recent audits have identified a need to improve our public transport system – both for the benefit of travellers and to assist in achieving better air quality.

Bus Transitways can provide a good public transport solution for lower density population areas, potentially at a relatively low capital cost. This audit examines the transitway running between Liverpool and Parramatta, the first of several planned for Sydney. This audit should contribute to a better understanding of the lessons learnt from this first project, and so to future transitways providing better value for money.

But this audit also raises broader issues.

It highlights the importance of accurately projecting the total cost of major infrastructure projects before governments lock in their decisions. It also highlights the need for sound decision-making processes when government agencies compete with the private sector. The principles and recommendations flowing from these issues are ones I would draw to the attention of all agencies, and to the Government.

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #146 - released 5 December 2005

Published

Actions for Oversight of State Owned Electricity Corporations

Oversight of State Owned Electricity Corporations

Treasury
Asset valuation
Financial reporting
Management and administration
Service delivery

Issues of corporate governance have long been a matter for concern in the private sector. Following recent corporate collapses and scandals, legislators and regulators in a number of countries have focused on strengthening governance in publicly traded corporations. Considerable attention has been given to setting clear expectations for the performance of boards and for the disclosure of information to various stakeholders.

Good governance is no less important in the public sector.

Indeed issues of oversight and accountability may be more complex in the public sector, particularly in government businesses. There are more stakeholders involved (portfolio Ministers, shareholder Ministers, Parliament and central agencies) and there are competing – and potentially conflicting - objectives (financial, social, environmental, etc).

Because of these potential conflicts, it is important that Boards understand what government expects of them. Some of these expectations reflect the government’s regulatory role in areas such as safety, pricing and ensuring consumers receive essential services. Some expectations reflect the government’s role as a business owner.

Having a clear separation of regulatory expectations from ownership expectations is essential if boards are to be accountable for their performance on both aspects. To assist in this separation, New South Wales (like many other jurisdictions) has adopted the concept of ‘shareholder Ministers’ – as distinct from the portfolio Minister – to exercise the ownership function.

This report looks more closely at a particular area - how the State conducts itself as the owner of the State owned electricity corporations. This is an important issue as the State’s (ie taxpayers’) equity in these businesses is worth over $9 billion. Managing the risks associated with continuing ownership of these businesses is an essential aspect of good governance.

Although the audit focuses on the State’s holdings in the electricity sector, its findings and recommendations have relevance for all State owned corporations.

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #144 - released 19 October 2005

Published

Actions for Implementing Asset Management Reforms

Implementing Asset Management Reforms

Justice
Planning
Finance
Treasury
Asset valuation
Financial reporting
Infrastructure
Internal controls and governance
Management and administration
Project management

Hospitals, schools, public housing, roads, bridges, buses and trains are just some of the assets used by government in providing services to citizens.

The NSW Government’s asset base is impressive in size - with a value of around $167 billion and with government plans to spend around $8 billion acquiring or replacing assets in the current year. Another $2 billion is spent each year on maintenance.

Good asset management is very important to government; even a small efficiency gain in this area can provide significant returns. Good practice by those responsible for managing assets can improve reliability, extend asset life, save on maintenance costs and aid in identifying and disposing of unnecessary or non-performing assets.

Improving the NSW public sector’s approach to asset management has been on the reform agenda for at least a decade. Changes in practice have been accelerated more recently by integrating asset management policy with the budget process.

In this audit we examined NSW Treasury’s efforts to improve asset management practices in the public sector and the progress made by 3 agencies - the Department of Corrective Services, NSW Fire Brigades and the Powerhouse Museum - towards better managing their asset portfolios.

This report informs Parliament and the community on progress to date and what more needs to be done to ensure that agencies manage assets effectively and achieve best value.

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #143 - released 12 October 2005

Published

Actions for In-year Monitoring of the State Budget

In-year Monitoring of the State Budget

Finance
Premier and Cabinet
Compliance
Financial reporting
Internal controls and governance
Management and administration

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

Published

Actions for Follow-up of Performance Audit: Collecting Outstanding Fines and Penalties

Follow-up of Performance Audit: Collecting Outstanding Fines and Penalties

Finance
Internal controls and governance
Management and administration
Service delivery

Periodically we review the extent to which agencies have implemented the recommendations they accept from our earlier audits. This gives Parliament and the public an update on the extent of progress made.

In this follow-up audit, we examine changes following our April 2002 report on how well the State Debt Recovery Office (under the Office of State Revenue) was collecting outstanding fines and penalties.

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #132 - released 17 March 2005