NSW Audit Office - Awareness - Issue 2003 09 - October 2003

The Audit Office Of New South Wales

Informations

• Publié par: Nesheg
• Nombre de lectures: 8
• Langue: English

Extrait

AWARENESSccounting and Auditing Developments Issue 9 OCTOBER 2003
AUDIT OFFICE 1AUDIT OFFICE UPDATE
UPDATE
PERFORMANCE AUDIT REPORT-FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
ACCOUNTING 3MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT, PREMIER’S DEPARTMENT, DEPARTMENT
UPDATE
OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING
Freedom of information (FOI) laws aim to give people the right to obtain access to AUDITING 7
information held by the Government. They have been recognised as a fundamental UPDATE
element of government accountability and modern democracy, and have been
URGENT ISSUES 9adopted by governments worldwide.
GROUP UPDATE
In this audit we examined FOI arrangements in three government agencies. In total
we looked at 84 FOI requests for non-personal information. INTERNATIONAL 11
UPDATEWe did not review the basis of decisions. Rather we wanted to find out whether
agencies acted in accordance with the spirit of FOI legislation. In particular, whether
MISCELLANEOUS 11
they: facilitate and encourage, promptly and at the lowest reasonable cost, the
PUBLICATIONS
disclosure of information (Section 5(3)(b) FOI Act 1989).
PREMIER’S 12Audit Opinion
DEPARTMENT
FOI Coordinators and their staff were supportive of the legislation. However, the
UPDATE
agencies we examined can do considerably more to fully achieve the intentions of
the Act. AUDIT OFFICE 13
BETTER PRACTICEOn the positive side, all three had processes in place to handle requests and had
GUIDESmade a number of changes to improve the effectiveness of the FOI process. Fees and
charges had also been kept to a minimum. No processing fees were requested in the
majority of cases, and if charged, were not unreasonable.
We believe there is value in making further improvements to address the following
issues:
processing fees being charged in some cases and not others even though a
similar amount of work had been undertaken
little documented evidence of the extent of searching which had been
undertaken to locate documents, making subsequent reviews more difficult
supporting reasons for refusing access to information not always being provided
to applicants
involvement of CEOs or Ministerial staff prior to determinations being finalised.
This opens the possibility for perceptions of interference and may affect an
agency’s capacity to conduct an unbiased internal review
no routine or formal analysis of reviews of decisions to determine whether
changes in practice are required
timeframes not being achieved.
Awareness is published by The Audit Office of New South Wales, 234 Sussex Street,
Sydney NSW 2000, GPO Box 12, Sydney NSW 2001 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
Email [e-mail] Website www.audit.nsw.gov.au
CONTENTSRecommendations
This report illustrates the range of challenges which agencies may face when handling FOI requests. While
we examined only three agencies, the issues and recommendations apply to all organisations responsible
for handling FOI requests.
Further information
Stephen Horne, Director Performance Audit Phone: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail].
This report was tabled in Parliament on 28 August 2003 and can be accessed at www.audit.nsw.gov.au.
NSW POLICE AND NSW ROADS AND TRAFFIC AUTHORITY: DEALING WITH
UNLICENSED AND UNREGISTERED DRIVING
The audit looked at how well the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) and the NSW Police work together
to deal with unlicensed and unregistered driving. RTA registers motor vehicles and licenses drivers, and
the NSW Police detects breaches of the law.
Laws require that drivers must be licensed and vehicles must be registered. These laws are designed to
ensure that people drive safely and that vehicles are roadworthy.
In New South Wales, 561 people died as a result of road accidents in 2002 and over 28,000 were injured.
Apart from the personal trauma, the RTA estimates the cost of the State’s road accidents at around $2.5
billion per year.
Key Findings
Over the last few decades, improved vehicle design and the efforts of the RTA and Police have significantly
reduced road accident trauma. However more needs to be done to address unlicensed and unregistered
driving.
RTA and Police do not know the extent of unlicensed driving, as they have not agreed on a method to
determine this.
Police do not have technology that can quickly check licence and registration details against RTA records
when they stop vehicles. Consequently they are only checking these details in one in 20 vehicle stops.
Also the law does not allow ‘red-light’ and speed cameras to be used to detect unregistered vehicles.
Less than one in 4 fines for unlicensed and unregistered driving are paid. Courts are more likely to dismiss
suspended driving cases if Police are unable to establish that the driver was aware of the suspension.
Under current law a driver who claims not to have been informed that their licence or vehicle registration
has been suspended has a valid defence if the claim cannot be refuted.
We found a significant level of repeat offending. Seventy per cent of unlicensed driving charges going to
court are second or subsequent offences.
2 3The Audit Office of New South Wales The Audit Office of New South WalesRecommendations
We recommend that the Government consider:
giving police power to conduct random licence and registration checks
using red light and speed cameras to detect unregistered vehicles
the adequacy of arrangements for notifying drivers of licence suspension
the effectiveness of arrangements for enforcing laws relating to unauthorised driving.
We recommend that the NSW Police and RTA improve arrangements for the appropriate exchange of
information.
We recommend that the NSW Police improve the information available to target and detect unauthorised driving
and in particular:
equip police on the roadside with technology that can quickly verify licence and registration details
facilitate the exchange of information with the Infringement Processing Bureau
improve the integration of traffic policing with other policing activities.
We recommend that the RTA ensure that customers are informed of licence and registration suspension and
cancellation.
Further information
Tom Jambrich Assistant Auditor-General Performance Audit Phone: [phone] E-mail: tom.jambrich@
audit.nsw.gov.au
This report was tabled in Parliament on 4 September 2003 and can be accessed at
www.audit.nsw.gov.au.
ACCOUNTING UPDATE
CHANGE TO PROCESS FOR ISSUING AUSTRALIAN EQUIVALENTS TO INTERNATIONAL
ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
The Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) decided on 4 September 2003 to change its proposed
schedule for making AASB standards equivalent to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs).
The decision was based on a legal opinion the Board has received, relating to the process of making
standards. It does not affect the policy of adopting the standards of the International Accounting
Standards Board (IASB) in Australia by 1 January 2005 (as announced by the Financial Reporting Council
(FRC) in July 2002).
Previously, the AASB had intended to issue the new AASB standards in a staged process, making each
Standard as it was approved. The Board has now decided that all Australian equivalents to IASB standards
will be made at the same time, when the set is complete. This is likely to be around April 2004, following
finalisation by the IASB (by 31 March 2004) of all its standards.
Until then, the AASB will continue its schedule of approving the equivalents and, subject to resolution of
copyright issues, place them as Proposed Standards on its web site, available for downloading.
2 3The Audit Office of New South Wales The Audit Office of New South WalesPROCESS OF CONVERGENCE
As part of the process to converge Australian Accounting Standards with International Reporting Standards,
the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) has issued the following Exposure Drafts. The preface
to each Exposure draft:
Compares the requirements in the International Standard to those in the current Australian
equivalent
Identifies differences between the International Standard and the equivalent International Public
Sector Standard (IPSAS)
Proposes Amendments to the current Australian equivalent, and
Seeks comments on specific issues.
ED 121 REQUEST FOR COMMENT ON IAS 31 FINANCIAL REPORTING OF INTERESTS
IN JOINT VENTURES
The Exposure Draft identifies the following incompatibilities between AASB 1006 and IAS 31:
1. IAS 31 applies to investors in a joint venture that are not venturers. In contrast, AASB 1006 applies
only to venturers.
2. IAS 31 requires entities that are acquired and held exclusively with a view to their disposal in the
near future and entities operating under severe long-term restrictions that significantly impair their
ability to make distributions to the venturer to be accounted for in accordance with IAS 39. Under
IAS 39, such investments would generally be classified as available-for-sale financial assets and
measured at fair value without any deduction for disposal costs. AASB 1006 excludes such entities.
Therefore, the treatment of investments in such entities under Australian GAAP is governed by the
general requirements of AASB 1041.
3. AASB 1006 requires, and IAS 31.32