Page 4920 - Week 16 - Tuesday, 26 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
from industry, the community and the trade unions. I expect that that advice, given directly to me, will again see further impetus to economic development in the Territory. There was little else in members' comments that I could take exception to, and I would like to thank them for their contributions.
Proposed expenditure agreed to.
Proposed expenditure - Division 40 - Audit Services, $1,526,300
MR JENSEN (5.37): I will be reasonably brief. The independence of the Auditor-General is one of the key principles in the operation of an Assembly, particularly one like ours, with a single parliamentary house and the administration we have. The independence of an Auditor-General who reports directly to the parliament and not the Executive is, of course, one of the fundamental factors in overseeing the operation of financial matters within a budget. As we all know, matters that are looked at by the Auditor-General are referred directly to the parliament and then are considered by the Public Accounts Committee, a committee of which I have been privileged to be a member since this Assembly commenced.
There are statutory requirements that an Auditor-General is required to comply with. There are a certain number of accounts that he or she is required to audit. All the various departments, statutory authorities and bodies that the Auditor-General is required to audit are set down quite clearly. I think that generally they can be pretty well sorted out and budgeted for, unless, of course, there are problems associated with a particular department, as we have seen in the past. The Auditor-General expended more money than was required because of the problems associated with the Health Department, which has been, as we all know, a problem for a considerable number of years.
It is in the area of efficiency audits that the Auditor-General can make a major impact on the operation of the financial system within the ACT. It is this area that my colleague Mr Collaery has already referred to, I believe, in debate today. That is where there is a requirement to establish some formal process whereby the Auditor-General has some flexibility in his ability to conduct these sorts of programs. I do not think it is appropriate just to provide an amount of money and say that he can do only six efficiency audits during this particular budget period, because one of those audits may be a quite major operation as a result of an issue that arises during the year. There needs to be some flexibility in the ability of the Auditor-General to carry out his duties.
Maybe there needs to be some sort of system whereby the Assembly, and not necessarily the Executive, comes up with additional funds if the Auditor-General requires them. What I am suggesting is that the Auditor-General get a
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .