Page 2682 - Week 09 - Thursday, 25 August 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - STANDING COMMITTEE
Report on Review of Auditor-General's Report No. 5 of 1992
Debate resumed from 15 September 1993, on motion by Mr Kaine:
That the report be noted.
MS ELLIS (11.31): Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise briefly to address this issue. The initial report from the PAC was presented by the chair, Mr Kaine, in September of last year. I believe that the Government has presented its response to that report. Many of the issues that were addressed in the PAC's report related to the Auditor-General's report No. 5 of 1992. Quite an amount of time has gone by since then. I find it interesting that some of the content of both the Auditor-General's report and the PAC's report referred to things like accrual accounting. The PAC grasped that issue with quite an amount of enthusiasm. As the Assembly may recall, it visited New Zealand in the last few months to look at that very issue. In the meantime, I am aware, as a member of the PAC and as a member of this place, that quite an amount of work has been done within certain agencies of the Government in relation to the adoption of accrual accounting. That issue is proceeding.
We are also aware, through both the estimates process and subsequent PAC processes, that the comments regarding budget presentation or budget paper outcome presentation have been worked on and many improvements have been made. I am of the view, given the time that has passed since both the tabling of the PAC's report and the tabling of the Government's response, that many of the things that were of concern in the initial Auditor-General's report, were brought to the PAC's attention and were included in our report have been addressed or are in the process of being addressed. I understand that the most recent Auditor-General's report that has been brought down in this place is the current version of this one. Obviously, the PAC is going to have an opportunity to revisit and to do a check on exactly where the corrections that were suggested by both the AG and the PAC are up to within the Government process. I know that the Government has taken the suggestions of the Auditor-General and the PAC in a proper manner, in most cases, if not in all. It is the role of the PAC to adopt a monitoring role and to see that those corrections and improvements to the systems continue. I know from the work that the PAC has done in the past that that will probably be done very quickly, and I will be happy to be part of that. That is all I need to say today, Mr Deputy Speaker, except to mention that it is a bit of a pity that, because of the programming, these things take so long to come to fruition in this place.
MS FOLLETT (Chief Minister and Treasurer) (11.34): I would like to refer initially to the Government's response to report No. 5 of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. As Ms Ellis has said, this report was submitted nearly a year ago now. It was concerned with budget presentation and aggregate financial statements. I would like to address those two issues, just very briefly.
On the budget outcome presentation issue, the recommendations of the PAC and also of the Auditor-General were implemented with the presentation of the 1993-94 and 1994-95 budgets. The budget has been presented on a cash basis in a format that is consistent with the Auditor-General's findings. Budget Paper No. 2 addresses the Auditor-General's
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .