Chapter 2 - Annual Reports
2.1
The committee considered all of the following reports to be 'apparently
satisfactory'. Comments are made to indicate where improved compliance with
legislative reporting requirements is expected.
Commonwealth authorities
Australian Fisheries Management
Authority
Comments
2.2
The committee reminds AFMA that certain details of directors must be
provided in the annual report, including the qualifications of each director
and whether the director is executive or non-executive.
2.3
The committee also notes that under paragraph 4(1)(d) of the CAC Orders,
certification of the report must also include a statement that directors are
responsible for the preparation and content of the report of operations under
section 9 of the CAC Act. AFMA is encouraged to include such a statement in its
letter of transmittal in future reports.
2.4
These are, however, very minor discrepancies, and the committee commends
AFMA for its consistently outstanding reporting performance.
Operations and Performance
2.5
In November 2005 the Australian Government launched the $220 million Securing
Our Fishing Future package. As part of this initiative, on 16 December 2005, the Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation issued
AFMA with a ministerial direction under section 91 of the Fisheries
Administration Act 1991. The direction required AFMA to
...accelerate our programs aimed at ending overfishing,
re-building overfished stocks and minimising fishing impacts on the marine
environment in Commonwealth fisheries.[1]
2.6
The committee notes that AFMA has comprehensively reported its progress
in implementing the ministerial direction in an appendix to the report. Some of
the key measures undertaken in response to the ministerial direction include:[2]
- the completion of Ecological Risk Assessments for all major
Commonwealth fisheries;
- the development and preparation of a Harvest Strategy Framework
across all Commonwealth fisheries. This will clearly state the rules and
processes for the creation of management measures; and
- the introduction or reduction of total allowable catches for a
number of overfished stocks.
2.7
AFMA was also granted additional funding to continue its work combating
illegal foreign fishing. This facilitated the opening of a new base for foreign
compliance operations in Darwin, which will eventually house up to 50 staff.[3]
Australian Pesticides and
Veterinary Medicines Authority
2.8
The committee observes that in its enabling legislation, APVMA is
defined as a statutory agency for the purposes of the Public Service Act
1999. Consequently, under section 311A of the Commonwealth Electoral Act
1918, APVMA is required to report on any amounts paid to any advertising,
market research, or any related agencies during the financial year. The
committee reminds APVMA that if it has nothing to report against this requirement,
it should clearly indicate this with a nil entry.
Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Comments
2.9
The committee notes that in addition to the obligation to report any
ministerial directions issued to the authority under paragraph 12(1)(a) of the CAC
Orders and sections 12 and 49 of the Civil Aviation Act 1988, CASA is
also required to report on any general polices of the government notified by
the minister under paragraph 12(1)(b) of the CAC Orders. The committee
encourages CASA to report on this requirement in future reports, and reminds CASA
that if it has nothing to report against this obligation, this should be
indicated by a nil entry.
2.10
The committee considers this a minor divergence from the reporting
requirements and commends CASA on an otherwise exemplary annual report.
Operations and Performance
2.11
CASA underwent significant change during 2005-2006, with the
implementation of a new organisational structure on 1 July 2005, in order to align CASA more closely with the operations of the aviation industry.
Consequently, a number of changes in senior management also took place. The
restructure included the relocation of operational headquarters to Brisbane.[4]
2.12
CASA continued to implement structural change during the financial year,
with the creation of the following new offices:
- Industry Complaints Commissioner. This office was established in
February 2006 in an effort to ensure consistency of regulatory decision making
and reduce the trend of industry complaints.[5]
- Planning and Governance Office. Established in November 2005 to consolidate
strategic roles within CASA and to facilitate effective coordination of working
groups.[6]
2.13
On 1 January 2006, CASA introduced the first phase of its cost-recovery
program, which will be implemented over three years to bring CASA in line with
the Australian Government's formal cost-recovery policy. The fee structure is
designed to charge realistic fees which reflect the costs incurred by CASA and
will result in a sustainable funding model for the authority. CASA notes that
in response to feedback regarding the new fee structure, certain reforms will
be implemented in Phase 2, which was due to be implemented from 1 July 2007.[7]
Cotton Research
and Development Corporation
2.14
The committee compliments the CRDC on a generally well constructed
report. The committee particularly appreciated the CRDC's clear and readily
understandable method of recording its performance against objectives. In
addition, the CRDC addressed factors, trends or events affecting their performance,
risks and opportunities the authority faced, and the strategies adopted to
manage these, very well.
Fisheries Research and Development
Corporation
2.15
The committee encountered some difficulty in ascertaining the FRDC's
compliance with various obligations under its enabling legislation and the CAC Orders,
as a number of reporting requirements were not included in either the
compliance or alphabetical indices. In particular, the committee found it
difficult to determine if the FRDC had addressed reporting requirements under
its enabling legislation, the Primary Industries and Energy Research and
Development Act 1989 (PIERD Act), regarding its activities involving
patents and details of any significant acquisitions or dispositions of real
property by the FRDC during the financial year.[8]
The committee encourages the FRDC to include a more comprehensive compliance
index in upcoming reports.
2.16
The committee also notes that readers of the annual report are again referred
to the FRDC's website for details relating to the responsibilities of the
FRDC's board committees. The committee encourages the FRDC to include this
information in the body of its report in the future, as required under section
15 of the CAC Orders.
Forest and Wood Products Research
and Development Corporation
2.17
The committee is disappointed that despite comments in its report Annual
reports (No. 2 of 2006), the FWPRDC has again failed to include a
compliance index or an alphabetical index.[9]
The committee calls the FWPRDC's attention to subsection 6(1) of the CAC Orders
which quite clearly states that reports 'must be constructed having regard to
the interests of users', and expects that the FWPRDC will include appropriate
aids to access in upcoming annual reports.
2.18
Due to the absence of any form of index, the committee found it
considerably difficult to assess whether the FWPRDC had satisfied its reporting
requirements under both the CAC Orders and its enabling legislation, the PIERD
Act. In particular, the committee was unable to locate information in FWPRDC's
annual report regarding any significant acquisitions or dispositions of real
property during the financial year, or details of any interest it holds in
companies, information which the FWPRDC is required to include in its annual
report under the PIERD Act.[10]
Grains Research and Development
Corporation
2.19
The committee is pleased to note that the GRDC has included a corporate
governance statement in the body of its Annual Report 2005-2006, as
recommended in the committee's report Annual reports (No. 2 of 2006).[11]
2.20
However, the committee observes that readers are still referred to the
GRDC website for details regarding FOI Act reporting obligations. The committee
reminds the GRDC that information required under subsection 8(1) of the FOI Act
must be included in the body of GRDC's annual report, and expects that the GRDC
will comply with this requirement in future reports.
Grape and Wine Research and
Development Corporation
2.21
The committee again noticed that the compliance index in this report was
not comprehensive, and due to the absence of an alphabetical index, the
committee encountered some difficulty in ascertaining whether the GWRDC had
complied with all relevant statutory reporting requirements.
2.22
The committee notes that while a page reference regarding judicial
decisions and reviews by outside bodies was included in the compliance index,
no information relating to these matters could be identified in the body of the
report.
2.23
The committee is disappointed that despite concerns raised in the report
Annual reports (No. 2 of 2006), the GWRDC has not attempted to
demonstrate its compliance with sections of the PIERD Act requiring information
on the GWRDC's activities involving patents or any interest it may hold in
companies.[12]
Land and Water Australia
2.24
The committee noted with some interest that entries in the LWA's
compliance index refer to a table which sets out the authority's compliance
with government statutes and policies. While this table is useful, it does not
detail the activities the LWA has undertaken to adhere to the relevant
legislation. The committee reminds the LWA that in its annual report, the authority
is required to record activities which demonstrate its compliance with
legislative requirements. It is not satisfactory to simply state that the authority
is compliant. The committee notes that the relevant information is included in
the body of the report, but is not referenced in the compliance or alphabetical
indices. The committee suggests that the LWA references legislative
requirements appropriately in future reports.
2.25
The committee notes that the LWA records its achievements against
outputs well, but considers that the LWA annual report would benefit from a
chart which clearly defines and links statutory objectives, annual operational
plan or corporate plan objectives, research and development objectives and
outputs/outcomes.
Rural Industries Research and
Development Corporation
2.26
The committee recognises the RIRDC's exemplary method of reporting against
its corporate plan, and further commends the authority for certifying its
compliance with the Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines.
2.27
The committee notes with interest that readers of the RIRDC annual
report are referred to the authority's Employment Policy for details pertaining
to RIRDC's compliance with OH&S Act requirements. The RIRDC is reminded
that under section 17 of the CAC Orders, and section 74 of the OH&S
Act, the RIRDC is required to include this information in its annual report.
Sugar Research and Development
Corporation
2.28
The committee suggests that in future reports, the SRDC record
attendance at board meetings and attendance at board committee meetings
separately, as the attendance of board committee members who are not directors
of the board, is not recorded in the table currently provided.
Wheat Export Authority
2.29
The committee wishes to make it clear that comments made in this report
relate solely to the quality and content of WEA's annual report, and should not
be construed as being comments on the wider issues in which the WEA is involved.
2.30
The committee appreciates the WEA's method of tabulating results against
outputs in a manner which is very easy to comprehend, and commends the WEA for
clearly and specifically measuring the efficiency and effectiveness of the
operations and strategies employed to achieve its outputs.
2.31
The committee found that while the WEA provided useful information on
how the authority is responsible to the minister, no statement regarding any
specific directions issued by the minister was apparent in the annual report.
The WEA is reminded that under section 12 of the CAC Orders, it is required to
include this information in its report. If the WEA has nothing to report under
this requirement this should be indicated with a nil entry.
2.32
The committee also notes that in the WEA's letter of transmittal, the
statement that directors are responsible for the preparation and content of the
report of operations, is made under section 48 of the CAC Act as opposed to
section 9 as required under paragraph 4(1)(d) of the CAC Orders.
Commonwealth companies
Australian Rail Track Corporation
2.33
The committee restates that it considers the ARTC annual report would
benefit from a more comprehensive alphabetical index. The inclusion of a
compliance index would also be useful.
2.34
The committee is disappointed that despite comments made in its report Annual
reports (No. 2 of 2006), the ARTC again omitted to include information in
its annual report regarding any events since the end of the financial year which
may affect the corporation's operations, or regarding any legal proceedings on
behalf of the company.[13]
The ARTC is reminded that it is obliged to report on this information under the
Corporations Act 2001.[14]
2.35
The ARTC's attention is again drawn to the document Printing
standards for documents presented to Parliament, which quite explicitly
states that all documents that are to be presented to Parliament must be
printed in international B5 size.[15]
The ARTC's Annual Report 2006 was again an A4 size document. It is the
committee's expectation that the ARTC will apply these printing standards when
producing upcoming reports.
Maritime Industry Finance Company
Limited
2.36
The committee notes that MIFCo again failed to specifically report on
any environmental reporting requirements it is subject to, or any legal
proceedings on behalf of the company, despite the fact that this information is
required under the Corporations Act 2001.[16]
MIFCo is reminded that if these requirements do not apply to their
operations, this should be indicated in the report.
Prescribed agencies
Dairy Adjustment Authority
2.37
The committee reaffirms its consideration that the DAA annual report
would benefit from a compliance index and a more comprehensive alphabetical
index.
2.38
The committee is disappointed that despite comments made in its report Annual
reports (No. 2 of 2006), the DAA has not fully demonstrated its compliance
with the Requirements for Annual Reports. In particular, the committee is
concerned that the DAA has again failed to provide a summary table of resources
by outcomes, and has not presented information regarding consultancies in
accordance with the mandatory proforma. As a prescribed agency under the FMA
Act, the DAA is subject to the Requirements for Annual Reports, and the
checklist provided in Attachment F to those requirements. The committee
expects that the DAA will carefully consider and incorporate these requirements
when compiling upcoming reports.
2.39
The committee commends the DAA for appropriately certifying is
compliance with the Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines.
National Capital Authority
2.40
The committee compliments the NCA on its consistently high reporting
standard. The outcome/output structure was again presented in an easily
comprehensible manner, and performance indicators were clearly tabulated. The
NCA's reporting against a number of statutory guidelines under the Requirements
for Annual Reports is exemplary, including its presentation of information on:
total resources used by outcomes, consultancy and contract services let, and
amounts paid to advertising, market research, or related agencies during the
financial year.
2.41
The committee is disappointed however, that notwithstanding comments
made in the committee's report Annual reports (No. 2 of 2006), the NCA
did not discuss its performance against its Customer Service Charter and did
not appear to include any certification of its compliance with the Commonwealth
Fraud Control Guidelines.[17]
These are both mandatory reporting obligations under the Requirements for
Annual Reports, and the committee expects that the NCA will address these
requirements in upcoming annual reports.[18]
2.42
The committee is particularly pleased to note that the NCA has included
a reference for discretionary grants in its compliance index as recommended in
the report Annual reports (No. 2 of 2006).[19]
However, a number of legislative obligations as listed in Attachment F to the
Requirements for Annual Reports were still not included in the compliance
index. The committee encourages the NCA to take this checklist into
consideration when compiling its alphabetical and compliance indices in the
future.
Senator the Hon.
Bill Heffernan
Chair
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page