Page 2685 - Week 09 - Thursday, 25 August 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
If the Government would open its mind and go and see what is done elsewhere, it may learn a great deal, and it may then be more open to the kinds of changes that the Auditor-General was speaking about in his report. I think that it is beneficial change. We are too slow in implementing it, and I would like to see a much more proactive role being played by the Treasury. The Auditor-General has taken the lead; he has made the points. That should, in my opinion, point the Treasury and the Government in some directions. The Public Accounts Committee will continue to review these matters and to press for their implementation. We would like to see change much more quickly than it is occurring.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - STANDING COMMITTEE
Report on Review of Auditor-General's Report No. 10 of 1993
MR KAINE (11.43): Mr Deputy Speaker, I present report No. 9 of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts entitled "Review of Auditor-General's Report No. 10, 1993 - Family Services Sub-Program". I move:
That the report be noted.
This report has to do with Auditor-General's report No. 10 of last year on an audit of the family services subprogram. The Auditor-General concluded, in general terms, that the branch was effective in achieving its objectives; that it was using appropriate strategies; that resources generally were being used efficiently; and that the branch was characterised by strong professional performance. I would think that that is not a bad report for a branch to get from an auditor. The Auditor found that the range of programs appeared to be well managed, with a clearly structured client approach and well-defined procedures for staff supervision, support and development, and for continuing review of individual programs against objectives. However, and this is the one qualification, while the report noted that the branch has been reviewing performance indicators, it considered that many are workload indicators or are not relevant to the work being performed. The audit report suggested that indicators based on outcomes and impacts would be more meaningful.
This is a subject that is dear to the hearts of members of this Assembly. Comment has been made a number of times on the floor of this house, and in various committees such as the Estimates Committee and the Public Accounts Committee - almost everywhere - that performance indicators are not good enough. Here is the Auditor-General, in an otherwise excellent audit report, commenting to the effect that there is one area in which this organisation fails, and that is in performance indicators. I have to say that the Minister has advised the committee that he accepts the audit view, and he has advised that performance indicators will be redeveloped. I accept the Minister's assurance on that point. The committee believes that the Minister's advice is an appropriate response to the audit recommendations. I commend to the Assembly our report on the Auditor-General's report.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .