Chapter 2 Summary of activities for 2012–13
2.1
In 2012–13, the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit (JCPAA)
held 24 meetings in Canberra (including six sectional committee meetings) and
tabled eight reports (including Report 433: 2011–12 Annual Report).
2.2
The following section details the activities of the Committee for 2012–13,
including:
n reviews and inquires;
and
n other Committee
activities.
Reviews and inquiries
Reviews of Auditor-General reports
2.3
The Committee is responsible for examining all of the Auditor-General’s
reports on behalf of the Parliament. This process is supported by regular
briefings from officers of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) on the
findings of tabled audit reports.
2.4
Following these briefings, the Committee selects audit reports for
further examination. Public hearings are then conducted on the selected reports
with witnesses present from both the audited agencies and the ANAO.
2.5
Guided by the findings of the audit report, at the hearings the
Committee generally focuses on determining how particular deficiencies or
issues arose, as well as what actions the agencies are undertaking to rectify
the shortcomings identified in the audit, in particular progress on
implementing the ANAO’s recommendations.
2.6
The Committee periodically tables reports in the Parliament on its
reviews of Auditor-General’s reports. The Committee’s reports incorporate the
evidence taken during public hearings and may include recommendations by the
Committee in addition to those already presented by the Auditor General.
2.7
Other parliamentary committees are also able to review ANAO reports that
are relevant to their area and portfolio coverage.
2.8
Since the last JCPAA annual report, the Committee has presented four reports
reviewing ANAO reports tabled in Parliament.
Report 431 – Review of Auditor-General’s Reports Nos. 24 to 32 (2011–12)
2.9
In August 2012, the Committee tabled a report reviewing nine audit
reports presented to Parliament by the Auditor-General between February and May
2012. The Committee selected two reports for further scrutiny at public
hearings held in June 2012:
n Audit Report No.29
2011–12, Administration of the Australia Network Tender Process; and
n Audit Report No.31
2011–12, Establishment and Use of Procurement Panels.
2.10
In its report, the Committee made two recommendations, and suggested
lessons for all APS agencies regarding the importance of government procurement
activities being undertaken in a manner that ensures value for money and
compliance with financial framework regulations.
Report 435 – Review of Auditor-General’s Reports Nos. 33 (2011–12) to 1
(2012–13)
2.11
In November 2012, the Committee tabled a report reviewing 24 audit
reports presented to the Parliament by the Auditor-General between May and
August 2012. The Committee selected the following five reports for detailed
examination:
n Audit Report No.41
2011–12, National Partnership on Literacy and Numeracy;
n Audit Report No.45 2011–12,
Administration of the Health and Hospitals Fund;
n Audit Report No.46 2011–12,
Administration of the Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy;
n Audit Report No.50 2011–12,
Processing and Risk Assessing Incoming International Air Passengers; and
n Audit Report No.1
2012–13, Administration of the Renewable Energy Demonstration Program.
2.12
Public hearings for two audit reports—Nos 41 and 46—were held in
September and October 2012 respectively. The Committee conducted its detailed reviews
of the remaining three audit reports through written correspondence.
2.13
While the findings of the selected audit reports were largely positive,
a range of areas for improvement were identified and the Committee made ten
recommendations.
Report 437 – Review of Auditor-General’s Reports Nos. 2 to 10 (2012–13)
2.14
In May 2013, the Committee tabled a report reviewing nine audit reports
presented to Parliament by the Auditor-General between August and November 2012.
The Committee decided to focus on recent developments in Indigenous service
delivery, and in doing so selected Audit Report No.8 2012–13 Australian
Government Coordination Arrangements for Indigenous Programs for detailed
review.
2.15
The Committee decided to expand the inquiry to obtain a fuller picture
of the issues facing Indigenous service delivery at a range of levels by:
n concurrently
examining two earlier Indigenous audit reports, in addition to the selected
report:
n Audit
Report No.43 2011–12 National Partnership Agreement on Remote Service
Delivery
n Audit
Report No. 26 2011–12 Capacity Development for Indigenous Service Delivery;
n inviting the National
Congress of Australia’s First Peoples and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Social Justice Commissioner to submit comments on the audits under
review; and
n calling the COAG
Reform Council to appear at a public hearing to discuss progress on the Commonwealth
of Australian Government’s National Indigenous Reform Agenda.
2.16
Public hearings on the three audit reports were held in Canberra during
February and March 2013.
2.17
The Committee made five recommendations, including for a high-level
review of leadership and collaboration arrangements in Indigenous affairs aimed
at strengthening the authority of the lead agency to drive changes across
government departments.
Report 439 – Review of Auditor-General’s Reports Nos. 11 to 31 (2012–13)
2.18
In June 2013, the Committee tabled a report reviewing 21 reports
presented to the Parliament by the Auditor-General between November 2012
and May 2013. The reports reviewed by the JCPAA in detail were:
n Performance Audit
Report No.17 2012–13 Design and Implementation of the Energy Efficiency
Information Grants Program; and
n ANAO Report No.28
2012–13 The Australian Government Performance Measurement and Reporting
Framework: Pilot Project to Audit Key Performance Indicators.
2.19
Public hearings for the two reports were held in Canberra in June 2013.
2.20
The Committee made two recommendations aimed at strengthening the
framework for, and culture of, performance monitoring, reporting and evaluation
in the Australian Public Service.
Review of Defence Materiel Organisation Major Projects Report
2.21
In addition to the review of ANAO reports referred to above, each year
the JCPAA scrutinises the Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO) through examining
the ANAO’s annual DMO Major Projects Report (MPR). In support of this process,
the JCPAA also annually reviews and endorses the MPR Guidelines prior to the
ANAO’s production of each report.
2.22
Each MPR is automatically referred to the JCPAA in accordance with its
statutory obligations to examine all reports of the Auditor-General. The
Committee currently examines each MPR through a public hearing, and prepares a
report to the Parliament.
2.23
The 2011–12 MPR was presented to the Parliament by the
Auditor-General in December 2012. The Committee held a public hearing in
March 2013 and received four submissions as part of its inquiry. Evidence was
given by representatives from the ANAO and the Defence Materiel Organisation.
2.24
In May 2013, the Committee tabled Report 436: Review of the 2011–12
Defence Materiel Organisation Major Projects Report on the outcomes of its
examination. The Committee made five recommendations in the report aimed at
enhancing transparency and accountability in relation to the acquisition and
sustainment of major defence projects.
2.25
The Guidelines for the 2012–13 MPR were endorsed by the Committee in September
2012, following discussions with the ANAO.
Australian Public Service Updates
2.26
In recent years, the JCPAA has held an annual meeting with the heads of
key agencies responsible for public sector governance and administration. The
meeting provides the JCPAA with a regular opportunity to discuss
whole-of-government issues and trends, and review the overall performance of
the Australian Public Service (APS).
2.27
As noted in the JCPAA 2011–12 Annual Report, the 2012 APS annual
update took place in June 2012. On 23 August 2012, Report 432—APS Fit for
Service (2012 APS annual update) was tabled.
2.28
On 26 June 2013, the Committee held its inaugural public hearing with
key whole-of-government scrutiny bodies. In attendance were the Auditor‑General,
the Australian Information Commissioner, Freedom of Information Commissioner
and the Commonwealth Ombudsman. The hearing gave the Committee an opportunity
to reflect on the overall state of Commonwealth administration. The Chair
included comments on the hearing in a Statement to the House made on 27 June
2013.
Commissioner of Taxation hearings
2.29
The Committee meets annually with the Commissioner of Taxation, and key public
sector stakeholders to discuss the performance of the Australian Taxation
Office (ATO) and current issues in taxation practice. From time to time the
Committee may extend its scrutiny by inviting other interested stakeholders to
make a submission or attend the meeting.
2.30
On Friday, 14 September 2012, the Committee held its 2012 public hearing
with the Commissioner of Taxation in Canberra. The ATO was joined by the
Auditor General, the Inspector General of Taxation, the Commonwealth Ombudsman,
and representatives from small business and tax professional organisations.
2.31
On 26 November 2012, the Committee tabled Report 434: Annual Public Hearing
with the Commissioner of Taxation—2012. The report contained a number of
recommendations around service standards, compliance, policy development and
external scrutiny.
2.32
On 26 June 2013, the Committee held an abridged version of its annual
meeting for 2013 with the Commissioner of Taxation. Also in attendance were the
Auditor-General, the Inspector General of Taxation and the Commonwealth
Ombudsman.
2.33
The Commissioner outlined his plans to restructure the ATO, execute a
vision out to 2020, modernise the way the office communicates with the public,
and to test business assertions to ensure the integrity of Australia’s
corporate tax base. The ATO’s scrutineers expressed support for the
Commissioner’s plans. The Chair included comments on the hearing in a Statement
to the House made on 27 June 2013.
Other inquiries
2.34
The Committee, on occasion, exercises its power to undertake policy
inquiries or may have a Bill referred to it by either House.
2.35
Policy inquiries may arise either from findings of the Auditor‑General
or at the initiative of the Committee. Over the term of the 43rd Parliament,
the JCPAA has tabled reports of three major inquiries: two that assisted in
scrutinising the role of the Auditor-General; and the most recent report on
National Funding Agreements examining the arrangements surrounding Federal
financial relations with States and Territories.
2.36
Bills dealing with subjects related to the JCPAA‘s functions—for
example, major changes in Commonwealth financial controls, management and
audit—may be referred to the Committee for inquiry and report.
Public Government, Performance and Accountability Bill 2013
2.37
The Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Bill 2013
(hereafter referred to as the Bill) was introduced into the House of
Representatives on 16 May 2013. On the same day, the House of Representatives
Selection Committee referred the Bill to the JCPAA for inquiry and report.
2.38
To inform the Committee of key issues related to the proposed modernisation
of the financial framework, stakeholders were invited to participate through written
submission or attendance at a public hearing.
2.39
Seventeen submissions, three supplementary submissions and an exhibit
were received. A number of stakeholders also referred the Committee to their
submissions made to the Department of Finance and Deregulation (Finance) as
part of the Commonwealth Financial Accountability Review. The public hearing
was held in Canberra on Friday 24 May 2013 and included representatives from
the ANAO, Finance, Office of the Australian Information Commissioner,
Australian Public Service Commission, a range of public sector bodies,
academics, and industry bodies.
2.40
On 4 June 2013, the Committee tabled Report 438: Advisory Report on
the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Bill 2013 recommending
that the objectives of the Bill be supported, but the timing of its passage be
a matter for the broader Parliament to determine. The Committee also made a
number of recommendations around independence, transparency and ongoing
evaluation of the reform.
Fair Work Commission (previously Fair Work Australia)
2.41
In May 2012, issues were raised in the Parliament following the release
of the KPMG Report: Process review of Fair Work Australia's investigations
into the Health Services Union. The JCPAA decided to seek advice from
stakeholders on steps taken to address matters raised on the report.
2.42
Following a briefing from Fair Work Australia, the Department of
Education, Employment and Workplace Relations and the Auditor‑General,
the Committee asked the responsible minister—the Minister for Employment and
Workplace Relations—to provide additional information on steps taken to date to
address both policy and administrative issues related to Fair Work Australia.
2.43
The Committee subsequently received a response from the Minister
outlining work underway and an undertaking to provide quarterly reports. Two
reports have been received, the first on 31 October 2012, and the second
on 14 March 2013.
Responses to JCPAA reports
2.44
The JCPAA’s reports can include both administrative recommendations and/or
policy recommendations. Responses to administrative recommendations can be decided
on and implemented by the relevant affected agencies, and are submitted to the
Committee in the form of an ‘Executive Minute’, which is tabled in the
Parliament by the Committee Chair. Policy recommendations may have direct
implications to existing Government policy and therefore require a response
from the relevant Minister, generally with the endorsement of Cabinet.
Government responses to policy recommendations are tabled in the Parliament by
a Minister.
2.45
Under a resolution adopted by the House of Representatives on
29 September 2010, the Government has given a commitment for responses to
Committee reports to be provided within six months of the date of a report's
tabling.
2.46
Upon receipt, the Committee reviews each Government response and
considers:
n whether it addresses
the issues raised in the report recommendations; and
n if any further action
should the taken by the Committee in regard to the Government’s response.
2.47
Table 2.1 below lists Government responses received by the Committee in
2012–13, either as a policy response tabled by the Government in the Parliament
or an administrative response submitted to the Committee from the relevant
agency. For further details, including copies of the responses and dates of
submission, see the Committee’s website.[1]
Table 2.1 Government responses received by the Committee
1 July 2012 to 30 June 2013
|
Report title
|
Status of response
|
Full response within six months
|
|
Report 426: Ninth biannual hearing with the Commissioner
of Taxation
|
Complete
|
No
|
|
Report 427: Inquiry into National Funding Agreements
|
Complete
|
No
|
|
Report 429 - Review of the 2010-11 Defence Materiel
Organisation Major Projects Report
|
Complete
|
Yes
|
|
Report 430 - Review of Auditor-General’s Reports Nos. 47
(2010-11) to 9 (2011-12)and Reports Nos. 10 to 23 (2011-12)
|
Complete
|
No
|
|
Report 431 - Review of Auditor-General’s Report Nos 24 to
32 (2011-12)
|
Complete
|
Yes
|
|
Report 434 - Annual Public Hearing with the Commissioner
of Taxation - 2012
|
Complete
|
Yes
|
|
Report 435 - Review of Auditor-General's Reports Nos. 33
(2011-12) to 1 (2012-13)
|
Complete
|
Yes
|
2.48
As at 30 June 2013, the response to Recommendation 1 of Report 423:
Review of Auditor-General’s Reports Nos.39 (2009-10) to 15 (2010-11) was
the only remaining overdue government response to a JCPAA report.
Other major Committee activities
Audit priorities of the Parliament
2.49
While the Auditor-General is given the authority to autonomously
determine the work program undertaken by the ANAO, the JCPAA is responsible for
determining and advising the Auditor-General of the Parliament’s audit
priorities.
2.50
As part of the identification of the Parliament’s priorities, the JCPAA
seeks input from all other parliamentary committees, asking for advice on any
programs or functions within their portfolio that they believe should be
audited. The consolidated list is then referred to the Auditor-General for
consideration in the finalisation of the ANAO's work program for the proceeding
financial year.
2.51
In April 2013, the Committee received the ANAO’s draft audit work
program for 2013–14. The JCPAA forwarded the draft program to all other
parliamentary committees in order to assist it in determining the audit
priorities.
2.52
Following the JCPAA’s deliberations and other committees’ responses, the
JCPAA advised the Auditor-General of the following audit priorities from the
ANAO’s draft Audit Work Program:
n Audit of Key
Performance Indicators
n Effectiveness of the
Cabinet Implementation Unit – Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet
n The Charter of Budget
Honesty
n Provision of Agency
Advice to Inform Ministerial Decisions on the Approval of Grants
n Agencies’ Preparation
of Budget Estimates
n Administration of
Government Advertising Arrangements
n Implementation of the
Information Security Manual
n Fraud Control
n Procurement
n Implementation of the
COAG Service Delivery Principles for Programs and Services for Indigenous
Australians
n 2012–13 and 2013–14 Defence
Materiel Organisation Major Projects Reports
n Administration of the
National Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements
n Defence Major Capital
Equipment Acquisition Test and Evaluation
n Materiel Sustainment Agreement
performance measurement
n Defence Major Capital
Equipment Acquisition Project Status Monitoring and Reporting
n Low Socio-economic
Status School Communities National Partnership Agreement
n Fair Work Commission
n Recommendations Made
in Previous ANAO Audit Reports – Department of Human Services
n Indigenous Servicing
Strategy – Department of Human Services
n Design and
Implementation of Streams 1 and 2 of the Regional Infrastructure Fund
n Administration of the
Parliamentary Budget Office
n Design, Implementation
and Administration of Rounds 3 and 4 of the Regional Development Australia Fund
n The Conduct of Value
for Money Reviews of Flood Reconstruction Projects in Victoria
n Australian Taxation
Office Service Standards
n Australian Taxation
Office Strategies to Address the Cash Economy
n Development and
Management of Contracts to Deliver Services at the Regional Processing Centres
on Manus Island and Nauru
n General Skilled
Migration Program
n Community Detention
and Bridging Visas for Irregular Maritime Arrivals
n Identification and
Management of Visa Overstayers
n Development and
implementation of Free Trade Agreements
n Exporter Supply Chain
Assurance System
n Caring for our
Country Initiative
n Management of
Payments to Statutory Research and Development Corporations
n Regulation of
Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines
n Quarantine
Biosecurity System.
2.53
The Committee also expressed support, as audit priorities of the
Parliament, for audits on the following topics that were not included in the
ANAO’s draft Audit Work Program:
n Agency implementation
of multicultural access and equity policy
n Management of the
Family Court of Australia, the Federal Court of Australia and the Federal
Circuit Court
n Scrutiny of the
airline and air and sea freight contracts and arrangements involving Norfolk
Island and the Indian Ocean Territories
n the Civil Aviation
Safety Authority regulatory reform process
n the effectiveness of
the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry's monitoring of the
implementation of ANAO and internal audit recommendations.
Review the annual budget of the ANAO
2.54
Under the PAAC Act, the Committee is required to consider ‘draft
estimates’ for the ANAO and the level of fees determined by the Auditor‑General.
2.55
In support of this process, the ANAO submits the draft estimates and
briefs the Committee on its ability to meet its mandate within the funding
envelope. The Committee then:
n is able to make
formal representations to the Government on behalf of the ANAO if necessary;
and
n make a statement to
both Houses of Parliament on budget day, expressing the Committee’s opinion as
to whether the ANAO has been given sufficient funding to perform its functions.
2.56
The intention of this process and the Committee’s power in considering
the draft estimates for the ANAO is to dissuade governments from attempting to
influence the Auditor-General through restrictions to the ANAO’s funding.
2.57
In February 2013, Auditor-General submitted the ANAO’s 2013–14 budget
estimates to the JCPAA, and briefed the Committee on the impact of the proposed
budget on the ANAO’s capacity to meet its mandate. On budget day—14 May 2013—the
Chair of the Committee made a statement to the House on the adequacy of the
ANAO’s appropriation, with a corresponding statement later delivered in the
Senate.[2]
2.58
On behalf of the Committee, the Chair noted the Auditor-General’s advice
that while the ANAO did not receive the level of appropriation that it had requested,
with the help of prior surpluses, it would be sufficient for him to discharge
his statutory obligations and his work program for the year ahead.
2.59
On this basis, and noting the tight fiscal environment, the Committee
endorsed the proposed Budget for the ANAO in 2013–14. However, the Chair noted
the Committee’s strong concern about the level of funding uncertainty in the forward
years and recommended that steps be taken in the 2014–15 Budget to place the ANAO
on a more financially sustainable footing.
Engagement with the Independent Auditor
2.60
An Independent Auditor is tasked with auditing the ANAO’s financial
statements, as well as periodically conducting performance audits of the ANAO.
In its role overseeing the ANAO, the Committee engages with the Independent
Auditor, including providing advice on the Parliament's priorities for future
audits of the ANAO.
2.61
In August 2012, the Committee examined the Independent Auditor’s
performance audit report on the ANAO’s IT Audit Capability and Resourcing,
and met with the Independent Auditor for a private briefing on the report.
2.62
In October 2012, the Committee considered a proposed schedule, submitted
by the Independent Auditor, of ANAO audit topics for the 2012–13 Financial Year
and future years. The Committee advised the Independent Auditor that it
considered the proposed audit program to offer a balanced selection, consistent
with parliamentary priorities. Further, the Committee supported an audit of the
ANAO’s Quality Control around Assurance Audit Services Group Financial
Statement Audits being adopted as a first priority.
2.63
In June 2012, the Committee noted the findings of the report on the
ANAO’s Quality Control Around Financial Statements Audits, which had
been recently tabled by the Independent Auditor.
The work and operation of the Parliamentary Budget Office
2.64
In accordance with the Parliamentary Services Act 1999, the
JCPAA’s role in relation to oversight of the PBO includes: approving the
appointment of the Parliamentary Budget Officer; considering the operations and
resources of the Office; and reporting to the Parliament on relevant matters
relating to the PBO.
2.65
In 2012–13, the Committee had formal consultations with the PBO to
consider its work plan and draft budget estimates.
2.66
On 11 October 2012, the Committee endorsed the PBO’s 2012–13 work plan,
noting that work was underway to address an inconsistency between the PBO’s
legislation and existing law and practice in the House of Representatives and
the Senate.
2.67
In March 2013, the Parliamentary Budget Officer submitted the PBO’s
2013-14 budget estimates to the JCPAA, and briefed the Committee on the impact
of the proposed budget on the PBO’s capacity to meet its mandate. On budget day—14
May 2013—the Chair of the Committee made a statement to the House on the
adequacy of the PBO’s appropriation, with a corresponding statement later
delivered in the Senate.
2.68
On behalf of the Committee, the Chair noted the Parliamentary Budget
Officer’s advice that while the PBO had a small level of additional savings
allocated to it over the next two years, it had received additional funding to
increase its permanent staffing in response to a decision by Government to
extend the PBO’s mandate. The Parliamentary Budget Officer had given assurances
to the Committee that overall the budget approved for 2013–14 provided the
necessary funding for the PBO to operate effectively and meet its legislated
mandate.
2.69
On this basis, the Committee endorsed the proposed Budget for the PBO in
2013–14.
Annual report requirements for Commonwealth agencies
2.70
Annual reports of Australian Government agencies are an important source
of both current performance and historical information.
2.71
Each year, in accordance with the Public Service Act 1999, draft
Requirements for Annual Reports for Departments, Executive Agencies and FMA Act
Bodies are submitted by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet to the
JCPAA for approval. As these provide the basis for agency reports, the
Committee carefully considers any proposals to amend, add or omit any
requirement.
2.72
On 19 June 2013, the Committee approved the 2012–13
Requirements for Annual Reports.
External engagement and communication
2.73
The JCPAA seeks to disseminate information on its role and activities,
and to contribute to enhancing public sector accountability. The Committee
ensures relevant information is accessible through its website at
www.aph.gov.au/jcpaa.
2.74
The Committee, often through the Chair, Deputy Chair and secretariat,
endeavour to meet with visiting delegations, attend seminars, make
presentations, and encourage regional engagement in support of the Committee's
work.
International engagement
2.75
Throughout 2012–13, the JCPAA has continued to work with the ANAO to
support regional parliaments with capacity building, including hosting
secondments for staff of the Indonesian public accounts committee equivalent
and continuing discussions for similar arrangements with Papua New Guinea
counterparts.
2.76
In August 2012, the Chair met with a parliamentary delegation from the
Lao People’s Democratic Republic. The delegation was particularly interested in
discussing the relationship between the Parliament and the office of the
Auditor General.
2.77
In September 2012, the Committee met with a parliamentary delegation
from Sweden. Discussions focused on taxation arrangements and economic
participation.
2.78
In February 2013, members of Afghan Public Accounts Sub-Committee met
with the JCPAA as part of a study tour to examine budgeting and oversight
mechanisms at the Parliament of Australia. Discussion with members of the Sub-Committee
has continued in relation to options for assistance in support of their
committee.
2.79
In November 2012, at the invitation of the Commonwealth Parliamentary
Association, the Chair attended the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association/World
Bank Institute Study Group on Public Accounts Committees, hosted by the
Legislative Assembly of British Columbia. The purpose of the meeting was to
discuss the role of the public accounts committee and emerging trends and
challenges, and recap the seminal public accounts committee book ‘The
Overseers’.
2.80
In February 2013, at the invitation of the Organisation for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD), the JCPAA Committee Secretary attended the
fifth annual OECD Parliamentary Budget Officials and Independent Fiscal
Institutions meeting in Ottawa, Canada. The Secretary presented a country
example of parliamentary oversight, and more specifically budget oversight,
under minority governments.
Australasian Council of Public Accounts Committees
2.81
The JCPAA is an active member of the Australasian Council of Public
Accounts Committees (ACPAC). ACPAC provides a forum for public accounts
committees to: exchange information and opinions; consider ways to improve
quality and performance in scrutinising government expenditure; and promote
communication between committees and Auditors-General, experts, the media and
the public.
2.82
Membership consists of parliamentary public accounts committees from
around Australia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Fiji and the Solomon Islands.
ACPAC holds biennial conferences for member and interested non-member
committees from the region, and smaller mid-term meetings on alternate years
for members only. These conferences are a valuable opportunity to exchange
views and experiences between the different jurisdictions.
2.83
In April 2013, the Chair participated in the ACPAC’s biennial conference
in Sydney, which was hosted by the New South Wales Legislative Assembly Public
Accounts and Audit Committee. The Chair made a presentation on ACPAC’s role assisting
to strengthen accountability in international parliaments and improving international
collaboration between public accounts committees.
Robert Oakeshott MP
Committee Chair
