| |||
|
|||
|
             |
 |
Annual Report 2002–03 You are currently viewing: Annual
report > Management and Accountability Management and accountabilityCorporate governanceThe Speaker of the House of Representatives is responsible to the Parliament for the department. The Clerk of the House of Representatives, who is responsible for managing the department, reports to the Speaker. Key elements of the department's corporate governance framework are outlined below. Legislative structuresThe department's operations are governed by the Parliamentary Service Act 1999 and the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (FMA Act), and are subject to provisions of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 and other legislation. Those acts set out the responsibilities of the Clerk for the management of the department. Ethical standardsThe Parliamentary Service Values and Code of Conduct, set out in the Parliamentary Service Act 1999, provide a framework for the department's ethical conduct. The department continued to promote the values and explain the code during the year: for example, the Clerk gave an address on the topic to all staff in February 2003. The values and the code also were addressed in the department's induction and orientation programs, in educational information provided to groups of staff, and in articles in the department's staff bulletin. All staff development exercises were linked to and rated in comparison with the values. Bookmarks listing the values and the code continued to be made available to new staff on their entry to the department. Senior managementSenior management of the department consists of the Executive and managers at the Executive Band 2 level. The Executive comprises the Clerk, the Deputy Clerk, and three Senior Executive Service (SES) Band 1 staff, each of whom has management responsibility for one of the three output groups. One of the SES Band 1 positions was vacant for much of the year, with the Deputy Clerk assuming responsibility for managing that output area. At the end of the reporting period a process to fill that vacancy was in progress and was expected to be finalised early in the new financial year. The Executive met quarterly with the Chief Financial Officer and the Director, People Strategies, to receive comprehensive reports on the department's financial and human resource performance. In addition, all areas of the department reported quarterly to the Executive, until that practice was suspended during a review of the structure and purpose of the department's reporting mechanisms, as discussed in more detail below. The Executive also met as required to discuss issues affecting the overall direction and management of the department. The Executive was assisted in the management of the department by directors and committee secretaries at the Executive Band 2 level who were responsible for managing the work units supporting the output groups.
Management committeesAudit CommitteeThe department's Audit Committee comprises the Clerk Assistant (Committees), the Clerk Assistant (Table), the Serjeant-at-Arms and the Chief Financial Officer. The committee, chaired in 2002–03 by the Clerk Assistant (Table), met five times during the year. The functions and responsibilities of the Audit Committee include:
The department's contracted internal auditor is KPMG. The major focuses of the 2002–03 internal audit plan were on ensuring compliance in financial management and processing, managing risk within work areas and reviewing controls. Consultative committeesThe department's Consultative Committee continued to be an important mechanism for communicating and consulting with staff on workplace issues. The committee had five formal meetings during the year. The committee discussed a broad range of issues, including: the consultation process for initiatives for change; the monitoring of workplace agreements; revised recruitment processes; and a range of other matters, including recognition and rewards processes, work performance assessment and leadership initiatives. The joint departmental (Department of the Senate and Department of the House of Representatives) Security Consultative Committee also operated. Among the issues it discussed in 2002–03 were: the impacts of reviews of security, particularly the Podger review; roster arrangements; staff uniforms; training; and the performance management system. The committee met on six occasions. In addition, the bargaining committee, convened to consider the next certified agreement for security staff, met four times in May and June 2003. Planning and evaluationThe department's planning and accountability activity continued to be emphasised by managers. Key elements of the department's planning and reporting framework are set out in Figure 7. Corporate planThe corporate plan for 2002–05 was released in June 2002, following a departmental planning day. The corporate plan continued to guide a range of other plans and departmental initiatives.
Business planThe department finalised the business plan for 2002–03 early in July 2002. The business plan, along with the corporate plan, continued to be the basis for periodic reporting to the Clerk and Deputy Clerk by departmental managers. The corporate and business plans, together with relevant work area plans, also formed the basis for determining the work objectives of individual staff members through the work performance management process. At the end of the reporting period, the business plan for 2003–04 was due to be launched early in the new financial year. Accountability mechanismsThe department's primary external accountability mechanisms were the Portfolio Budget Statements (PBS) and the annual report, copies of which were provided to all members. The department's annual report was prepared pursuant to section 65 of the Parliamentary Service Act 1999. It assessed performance against the targets outlined in the PBS, and presented the financial statements of the department. Risk assessment and fraud controlRisk management is an important focus within the department. Although previous risk assessments have identified a low risk level for the department, departmental staff maintain a heightened awareness of risk management activities. During the financial year, the level of risk in some areas of security was raised. This led to changes in the management of security during the year and an increase in security costs. One of the internal audit priorities was risk management in work areas. Internal audits were conducted on the Parliamentary Relations Office gift store, the printing office, information technology operations, the implementation of the department's new financial management information system (FMIS), the Document Production System software, and protection of information. The audits contained no significant adverse findings and reaffirmed the low levels of risk within the department. The gift store audit led to a change in inventory arrangements – the amount of stock held by the store was reduced and supplier arrangements were strengthened – to better meet the department's organisational requirements. Service chartersAs noted in last year's report, the Department of the House of Representatives Service Charter was published in the Members' Handbook produced for the Fortieth Parliament in January 2002 and the Service Charter: Community Service Standards was published in May 2002 on the department's website and made available in a leaflet. Both the charters present opportunities for the department to create better awareness of the services it provides and the service standards it aims to achieve. More importantly, the charters provide a basis for members and other people interested in the Parliament to assess the quality of services they receive. During the year, the service standards reflected in the charters were integrated into the departmental performance information framework for internal and external reporting.
External scrutinyThe department's operations are primarily administrative and generally are not subjected directly to formal external scrutiny. There were no judicial decisions or decisions in administrative tribunals during 2002–03 that had, or that may have, a significant impact on the operation of the department. As noted in last year's annual report, the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) identified two significant issues for the department in relation to internal financial control in its audits for the period ended 30 June 2001. As a result of action taken by the department to address those issues, the ANAO, in its audit of financial statements of Commonwealth entities for the period ending 30 June 2002, no longer identified any significant issues of financial control for the department's attention. The ANAO concluded its protective security audit of physical security arrangements (discussed in last year's annual report), in which the department participated. The ANAO found that protective security arrangements, both parliament-wide and within the department, were generally adequate, but made specific recommendations for areas of improvement. The department agreed with all the recommendations, and took action to implement the recommendations relevant to its own activities. The Security Management Board began implementing the recommendations that related to parliament-wide security. The department, represented by the Serjeant-at-Arms, gave evidence to the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit in relation to a review by the committee of the ANAO's report on protective security. As at 30 June 2003, the committee had not reported its findings. Freedom of informationThe department is not considered to be a department or agency for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act). It seeks, however, to comply with the intent of the FOI Act where practicable in relation to the release of administrative information. Extensive information about the structure of the department and employment opportunities is provided on the website and in hard copy documents (such as the annual report) published by the department. In addition, information was widely disseminated on how members of the public can interact with the work of the House and its committees. There were no freedom of information requests during the year.
You are currently viewing: Annual
report > Management and Accountability
|
