Relevant Excerpts from the Public Governance Performance and
Accountability Act 2013
1.1
The Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013, is
the cornerstone of the public management reform agenda which aims to modernise
the resource management framework of the Australian government to support high
quality resource management and performance. The PGPA 2013 is the first Stage, Stage
2 & 3 are progressing. Stage 2 focuses on the enhanced Commonwealth
performance framework; and Stage 3 builds on Stages 1&2 to explore specific
elements of the resources management framework. [1]
1.2
Cascading down from the Act are the facilitating rules and guidelines
including, Commonwealth Procurement Rules: Achieving Value for Money, (revised)
1 March 2017; and the supporting guidelines, Facilitating Supplier Payment
through Payment Card, Resource Management Guide No 416, November 2016.
1.3
Under the PGPA, the accountable authority is the Secretary or Chief
Executive who has responsibility for and control over the entity's operations.[2]
The accountable authority will establish internal controls and risk management
systems to ensure that officials use and mange public resources properly, to
achieve the purpose of the entities, and do not impose unnecessary red tape and
resource learning module.[3]
1.4
The PGPA establishes "whole of system concepts, standards and
requirements that apply to all entities in the Commonwealth", including a
"...common standard for proper use (efficient, effective economical and
ethical) that applies to the use and management of all public resources, no
matter whose hands they are in."[4]
1.5
All four elements need to be considered when looking at the proper use
of relevant resources.[5]
The official’s consideration must extend to whether the management of resources
is:
- Efficient: the proposed commitment is the most suitable way to deliver
the desired result; opportunities for abuse, mismanagement, error, fraud,
omissions and other irregularities can be minimised.
-
Effective: the proposed commitment is going to produce the desired
result taking into account the purpose and objectives of the entity or program
(as set out in entity's corporate plan).
-
Economical: avoids waste; is the best cost option to deliver expected
results; can be met from available resources or appropriations.
-
Ethical: the proposed commitment is consistent with the core beliefs and
values of society; complies with general duties of officials in s25-29 of PGPA
Act.[6]
1.6
The PGPA requires Defence, as a non-corporate commonwealth entity to
manage the risks associated with the proper use of (relevant) monies through
- Ensuring officials understand their duties and responsibilities
for the proper use of monies
- Identifying and establishing enterprise-wide means to manage that
risk through internal controls.
- Reporting on performance in the exercise of those controls.[7]
1.7
The Act prescribes the adoption of internal controls which “should
promote proper use of relevant money” by:
- aligning the internal financial delegations and authorisations in
the entities with clear instructions on the policies and rules that officials
must adhere to;
- addressing the risk associated with the use of relevant money in
the entity; and
- clarifying any other requirement that apply to the use of
relevant money.[8]
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents