|
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page
Chapter 2 - Background to the proposed changes to ACIAR
2.1
ACIAR is one of many statutory authorities established by the Australian
Parliament.
What is a statutory authority?
2.2
A statutory authority in the Commonwealth sphere is a generic term for a
body established through legislation for a public purpose.[1]
Such bodies undertake functions of government or provide services to the
community on behalf of government. Enabling legislation enunciates the specific
set of arrangements under which a statutory authority will operate.[2]
The Uhrig Review
2.3
In November 2002, the Government commissioned a review of the corporate
governance of statutory authorities and office holders. The main objective in
undertaking this review was to improve the performance of statutory authorities
and office holders and their accountability frameworks.[3]
Mr John Uhrig AO, a well-known business leader and former chairman of Rio
Tinto and Westpac, was appointed to conduct the review. He was to analyse the
existing governance arrangements for statutory authorities and office holders
and to identify reforms that might assist in improving the performance of these
bodies, without compromising their statutory status.[4]
The review was to address the selection process for board members and office
holders, the mix of experience and skills required by boards, and their development
and relationship to government.[5]
2.4
The committee has previously considered other bills pursuant to the
Uhrig recommendations. In May 2006, the committee inquired into and reported on
the Provisions of the Australian Trade Commission Legislation Amendment Bill
and later that year, in September, it inquired into and reported on the Export
Finance and Insurance Corporation Amendment Bill. Both reports discussed
the Uhrig Review in detail. In this report, the committee has focused on the review's
most relevant findings and recommendations.
2.5
Under the terms of reference, the Uhrig Review was to develop a broad
template of governance principles and arrangements that the government might
wish to extend to statutory authorities and office holders. In determining the
most appropriate structure and governance arrangements, it was to have regard
to the 'unique status of the Commonwealth as owner or shareholder, as the
sovereign government and the source of regulatory authority'.[6]
2.6
The government wanted statutory authorities and office holders assessed
against these principles and then to implement reforms that would be taken on a
whole-of-government basis.[7]
2.7
The review produced two governance templates which clearly delineated
between statutory authorities whose major activities were commercial and those
undertaking regulatory and service provision operations—the board template and
the executive management template.
Board template
2.8
The board template was judged to be better suited to operate under a
management structure that requires powers akin to those of a publicly-listed
company board.[8]
The review recommended that governance boards be used in statutory authorities
only where they can be given the full power to act.
2.9
In Mr Uhrig's view, a board did not provide the appropriate governance
structure for statutory authorities operating as service providers or
regulators.[9]
He developed an executive management template to accommodate such statutory
bodies.
Executive management template
2.10
The executive management template has a more limited governance
structure headed by a Chief Executive Officer (CEO) who is directly responsible
to the relevant minister. It recognises that the role of the minister in the
governance of some statutory authorities may be considered to be equivalent to
that of a single owner of an organisation who would retain the right to direct
the management on critical success factors, making a board redundant.[10]
It assumes that full delegation of power is not appropriate and that the
executive management group will be governed by the minister with support and
advice from the department. The CEO bears the full responsibility and
accountability for the governance and management of his or her agency.
Commonwealth Authorities and
Companies Act 1997 and the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997
2.11
The Uhrig Review also looked at the financial framework governing
statutory authorities and recommended that the financial frameworks generally
be applied based on the governance characteristics of a statutory authority,
that is:
- The Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997 (CAC
Act) be applied to statutory authorities where it is appropriate they be
legally and financially separate from the Commonwealth and are best governed by
a board. They fit the Board template.
- The Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (FMA
Act) be applied to statutory authorities where it is appropriate they be
legally and financially part of the Commonwealth and do not need to own assets.
(Typically, this would mean Budget-funded authorities.) They fit the executive
management template.
Government response to the Uhrig Review
2.12
The government supported the two templates developed by Mr Uhrig.
According to the Minister for Finance and Administration, Senator the Hon
Nick Minchin:
Both templates detail measures for ensuring the boundaries of
responsibilities are better understood and that the relationship between
Australian Government authorities, Ministers and portfolio departments is
clear.[11]
2.13
He announced that the government would implement the governance
templates recommended in the review. The aim was to establish 'effective
governance arrangements for statutory authorities' and achieve 'clarity in
roles and responsibilities'. Ministers were directed to assess the statutory
authorities within their portfolios against the governance templates. Senator Minchin
explained that the selection of the appropriate template would depend on the
degree to which the authority 'has been delegated full power to act'.[12]
2.14
The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade assessed ACIAR against the
principles and recommendations of the Uhrig Review. The assessment found that an
executive management template would be the most suitable governance structure
for ACIAR.[13]
2.15
The following chapter examines the specific provisions of the bill enabling
that transition in light of the recommendations of the Uhrig Review.
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page
Website feedback: web.senate@aph.gov.au
Last reviewed 12 June 2007 by the Senate Web Administrator
© Commonwealth of Australia
Parliament of Australia Web Site Privacy Statement
Images courtesy of AUSPIC
|
