❓ Question on Notice regarding the implementation of recommendations from the 'Putting the Public First' Economic Audit Committee report, specifically focusing on budget process improvements and accountability measures within WA government agencies. The response refers to another question, QoN 3912.
AnsweredQoN 3916Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the ‘Putting the Public First’ Economic Audit Committee report of October 2009, and in particular to recommendation five which was to, -
‘Strengthen the Budget process to promote efficient, effective and innovative achievement of outcomes by, -
(a) phasing in new funding models to derive agency Budget year and Forward Estimates, based on robust cost and demand modelling;
(b) enhancing accountability through -
(i) replacement of the existing centrally managed Treasurer's Advance with the allocation of specific Ministerial portfolio contingency provisions;
(ii) a requirement that agencies seeking funding over and above that which is available from their portfolio's contingency undertake a value for money (VfM) audit and/or price review, subject to materiality;
(iii) end-of-year reports by Ministerial portfolio, detailing material variances between Budget estimates and actuals and the extent of utilisation of portfolio contingencies, for consideration at ‘closing-out’ hearings of the Estimates Committee; and
(c) contributing to a public service culture that promotes value for money and innovation in service delivery by empowering agencies through multiple year Budget allocations, based on more robust estimates, over a longer time horizon’,
and ask -
(1) Which of the following milestones contained in recommendation five have been achieved, -
(a) prepare drafting instructions to revise the
Financial Management Act 2006
to replace the existing global Treasurer’s Advance with portfolio specific contingency provisions (June 2010);
(b) require agencies seeking funding over and above their agency or portfolio contingency to undertake a VfM audit subject to materiality considerations (from 2010-11); and
(c) incorporate key service delivery targets in agency Chief Executive Officer performance and resource agreements (see recommendation one)?
(2) If any of the above milestones contained in recommendation five have not been achieved, why not?
‘Strengthen the Budget process to promote efficient, effective and innovative achievement of outcomes by, -
(a) phasing in new funding models to derive agency Budget year and Forward Estimates, based on robust cost and demand modelling;
(b) enhancing accountability through -
(i) replacement of the existing centrally managed Treasurer's Advance with the allocation of specific Ministerial portfolio contingency provisions;
(ii) a requirement that agencies seeking funding over and above that which is available from their portfolio's contingency undertake a value for money (VfM) audit and/or price review, subject to materiality;
(iii) end-of-year reports by Ministerial portfolio, detailing material variances between Budget estimates and actuals and the extent of utilisation of portfolio contingencies, for consideration at ‘closing-out’ hearings of the Estimates Committee; and
(c) contributing to a public service culture that promotes value for money and innovation in service delivery by empowering agencies through multiple year Budget allocations, based on more robust estimates, over a longer time horizon’,
and ask -
(1) Which of the following milestones contained in recommendation five have been achieved, -
(a) prepare drafting instructions to revise the
Financial Management Act 2006
to replace the existing global Treasurer’s Advance with portfolio specific contingency provisions (June 2010);
(b) require agencies seeking funding over and above their agency or portfolio contingency to undertake a VfM audit subject to materiality considerations (from 2010-11); and
(c) incorporate key service delivery targets in agency Chief Executive Officer performance and resource agreements (see recommendation one)?
(2) If any of the above milestones contained in recommendation five have not been achieved, why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
29 June 2011
Responded by
Leader of the House representing the Premier
Response time
42 days
Please refer to Legislative Council Question on Notice 3912.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.