Page 4292 - Week 14 - Thursday, 24 October 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR KAINE: Under the terms of the resolution establishing the Public Accounts Committee, the committee is required to examine all reports of the Auditor-General laid before the Assembly. On 28 May 1991 Mr Speaker presented to the Assembly the Auditor-General's report No. 4 dealing with an efficiency audit of the management of capital works.
The committee has agreed that, rather than present a formal report to the Assembly in connection with this report from the Auditor-General, I, as presiding member, should make a simple statement on the committee's examination of it.
The committee wrote to the Minister for Urban Services on 26 June seeking a submission on the matters raised in the audit report. The Acting Secretary of the Department of Urban Services responded to the committee on 30 July 1991 on behalf of the ACT Government Service. The committee also sought and received additional information, specifically concerning the paving of pedestrian areas in some shopping centres. The committee has examined both the Auditor-General's report and the submission from the Department of Urban Services, and has also sought comments from the Auditor-General further to the department's submission; but the Auditor-General has no comment to make following his review of that submission.
Mr Speaker, I would like to comment on behalf of the committee on the comprehensive nature of the department's submission. The structure of the submission was based on reproducing chapter 7 of the audit report entitled "Detailed Audit Findings and Recommendations" and inserting departmental comment after each paragraph, whether that paragraph contained audit comment, findings, conclusions or recommendations. The committee found this approach to be comprehensive and helpful. Whilst this format is dependent upon the particular audit and the particular audit report, and is therefore not one the committee would wish to impose arbitrarily on all agencies, it resulted in a full and comprehensive response by the department to the committee.
The committee has been concerned that it has not received such responses from other agencies. Further comment on that matter will be made in future committee reports. I would like to take this opportunity, however, to make the point that submissions should not merely comment, and comment fully, on all recommendations of the Auditor-General. Audit comment, conclusions and findings should also be discussed as the committee is examining the complete audit report, not only the recommendations. The comprehensive nature of the department's submission was of great assistance to the committee and it provided sufficient information to allow the committee to decide that it was not necessary to proceed to public hearings in relation to that report.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .