Page 3722 - Week 12 - Thursday, 21 October 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
It seems from most of the comments that members of the community feel that, largely, we have got it right. It will be a matter now of determining how much we firm up those recommendations. Madam Speaker, I appreciate having the opportunity to make this paper public and to hear the comments of my colleagues.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - STANDING COMMITTEE
Report on Review of the Auditor-General's Report No. 3 of 1993
MR KAINE (11.57): Madam Speaker, I present report No. 6 of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts entitled "Review of the Auditor-General's Report No. 3, 1993 - Various Performance Audits Conducted to 30 June 1993", together with extracts of the minutes of proceedings. I move:
That the report be noted.
This report deals with a number of performance audits carried out by the Auditor-General during the 1992-93 period. Specifically, those reports dealt with debt recovery operations of the ACT Revenue Office; some Government activities that up until now have not been publicly accountable, specifically the ACT Racecourse Development Fund, the Workmen's Compensation Supplementation Fund and the Nominal Insurer; and, finally, motor vehicle driver licensing procedures in the ACT.
Generally speaking, the Public Accounts Committee has no difficulty with the government agencies' responses to the matters raised by the Auditor-General, but there are a couple of matters that I think are deserving of comment. The first has to do with the debt recovery operations of the ACT Revenue Office. When this report was tabled, some people were rather concerned at the level of arrears of collection of government taxes and fees and charges that was revealed. Specifically, there was a total of $8.7m of arrears of collection of taxes, and it was regarded as being doubtful whether $4.4m of that amount could ever be collected.
Taken on the face of it, they seem large sums of money; but the committee is satisfied that, in the context of the total amounts of revenue collected and having regard to comparisons with the performance of collection agencies in other places, both at the municipal level and at the State level, those figures are not particularly concerning. We are satisfied that the collection agency is operating quite efficiently and well in collecting the taxes the Government deems to be payable. The Public Accounts Committee does not share the concern expressed by some at the time of the tabling of this report that those figures are excessive or that they are a matter of considerable concern.
In connection with the debt recovery operation, the Auditor-General did comment that he felt that the collection agency was perhaps less efficient than collection agencies elsewhere in that they had more staff to do the job than other collection agencies did and that therefore they could become more efficient by reducing their staff numbers. The response from the Revenue Office was not to accept that proposition. There has been an exchange of communications between
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .