Chapter 3
Annual reports of agencies
3.1
The committee considered all of the following reports to be 'apparently
satisfactory'.
Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry portfolio
Commonwealth authorities
Wine Australia
3.2
The committee is pleased to note that Wine Australia has again certified
its compliance with the Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines in the prescribed
manner.[1]
3.3
The committee notes that there is a brief mention of the Australian
Wine and Brandy Corporation Act 1980 having been amended to Wine
Australia Corporation Act 1980, in relation to the new Label
Integrity Program. However, there is no mention of the name change from
Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation, to Wine Australia. As the name change
occurred in the 2010-11 financial year, the committee considers this to be of
significance, and should therefore have been included in the annual report.
3.4
The committee commends Wine Australia on its reporting under the
OH&S Act. The committee notes, however, that reporting under the FOI Act
did not contain a list of the categories of documents maintained, nor did it
provide specific contact details for inquiries. The committee therefore
considers that reporting under the FOI Act could be improved.[2]
Prescribed agencies
Australian Pesticides and Veterinary
Medicines Authority
3.5
The committee commends APVMA on its thorough reporting on performance.
It contains an assessment of progress towards outcomes, as well as relevant
descriptions of processes and activities. The committee notes, however, that
the readability could be improved if the information was provided in a table
format.[3]
3.6
A few mandatory reporting requirements, such as a narrative discussion
and analysis of performance, and trend information, were included in the list
of requirements as 'not applicable'. The committee agrees that this is
preferable to removing them completely from the list of requirements. However,
for reporting requirements that are listed as mandatory, not to be confused
with items that are listed as 'If applicable, mandatory', the committee
believes that if these items are not applicable, the report would benefit from
including a statement explaining why they are not applicable.[4]
3.7
APVMA's agency resource statement is found in the list of requirements,
however, the committee could not locate an agency resource table. Information
required to be in the agency resource table can be located throughout the
financial statements, however the committee does not agree an agency resource
statement has been included in the report. The committee points APVMA to
Attachment E of the Requirements of Annual Reports, which states, 'The annual
report must include in an appendix an Agency Resource Statement table' and
provides an example of what the table should look like.[5]
3.8
The committee again commends APVMA on its reporting on the management of
human resources. The committee is also pleased to note that, following comments
in its previous report, APVMA has included SES remuneration in the same section
as other classification levels and has also included the aggregated amount of
performance-linked bonus payments.[6]
Infrastructure and Transport portfolio
Commonwealth authorities
Airservices Australia
3.9
Airservices Australia has, overall, provided a thorough and
comprehensive annual report. The compliance index was again an improvement from
Airservices Australia's previous report, with the exception of reporting on
corporate governance statements, which was provided in the report, however, not
listed in the compliance index.[7]
The committee also reminds Airservices Australia that, in accordance with the
CAC Orders, the responsible minister must be listed by name.[8]
3.10
The review of operations not only provides a description of activities,
but also provides an assessment of performance. The layout is clear, with
helpful tables that enhance readability. The committee considers that including
another column in these tables, to mark whether the activity was found to be
'achieved', 'partially achieved' or 'not achieved', would benefit the review of
operations.[9]
3.11
The committee again commends Airservices Australia's thorough reporting
under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
(EPBC Act), the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act) and the Occupational
Health and Safety Act 1991 (OH&S Act).[10]
The information provided is both clear and comprehensive. The committee
especially notes the inclusion of statements relating to updates made to the
reporting requirements within the Acts.[11]
3.12
Airservices Australia lists a new five year pricing proposal as one of
its significant events for the financial year. The committee notes that the
previous five year pricing cycle ended in 2009, however, prices have been
frozen since that time, due to the global financial crisis.[12]
Civil Aviation Safety Authority
3.13
CASA has again fulfilled its reporting requirements to a high standard.
The report is clear and well structured, and CASA has provided comprehensive
reporting under the EPBC, FOI and OH&S Acts, as well as the National
Disability Strategy. The committee especially notes CASA's statements in
relation to amendments to the reporting requirements within these Acts, and the
statement to reflect the relevant changes from the Commonwealth Disability
Strategy to the National Disability Strategy.[13]
3.14
The compliance index is helpfully separated by legislative reporting
requirements, however, the committee notes some minor errors, and incorrect
page numbers provided.[14]
This did not hinder the committee's ability to assess CASA's compliance.
3.15
CASA's report on performance is presented in a clear, easy to understand
layout, with case studies and summaries provided. The committee notes CASA has
used a tick symbol to represent the status of result, with a key provided at
the beginning of the report on performance. The committee finds that for
results listed as one or two ticks, that is, 'delayed/may not meet the target'
or 'Some delay/issues being managed', the report would benefit from a statement
providing further information on the delays or issues being managed.[15]
3.16
The committee notes CASA's progress in its work on a new set of safety
regulations for maintenance and engineer licensing, under the Civil Aviation
Safety Regulations. CASA regards the release of the regulations as a 'key
moment in CASA's history', stating that the new regulations can reduce
complexities in the international aviation market, while also 'improving
Australia's competitive edge in the world air transport industry'.[16]
More than 7,000 Licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineers have been issued
licences under the new regulations.[17]
Australian Maritime Safety
Authority
3.17
The committee is pleased to note that, following comments in its
previous report, improvements have been made in AMSA's annual report,
particularly, to the compliance index. While some reporting requirements were
not included, for example, certification by directors and the Auditor-General's
report, the committee considers it to be a significant improvement from previous
annual reports. The layout of the index is clear, with separate headings for
different legislative reporting requirements.[18]
3.18
AMSA's reporting on performance is presented in a clear and easy to
understand format, with a helpful summary of highlights provided at the
beginning. The tables providing information on the targets and results are
clearly presented, however, the committee finds that the reporting on
performance would benefit from the inclusion of another column to mark targets
as 'achieved', 'partially achieved', or 'not achieved'.[19]
3.19
The committee notes that in 2010-11, 4668 foreign flag ships made 23 498
visits to 79 Australian ports. AMSA conducted 3131 port state control
inspections, from which 266 ships were detained until major deficiencies were
addressed.[20]
3.20
In 2013, AMSA will become the national safety regulator for all
commercial vessels as part of the national maritime safety reform. AMSA provided
the likely benefits that will be achieved as a result of coordinating the different
jurisdictions and laws, including a reduction in the complexity for vessel
owners, operators and suppliers.[21]
Statutory corporations
National Transport Commission
3.21
The NTC is not a Commonwealth authority for the purposes of the CAC Act,
however, the NTC's enabling legislation states that certain sections of the CAC
Act apply to it, including section 9, relating to annual reporting
requirements. Under Schedule 1 of the CAC Act, an agency's annual report must
include a report of operations prepared in accordance with the CAC Orders.
3.22
The committee is pleased to note that, following comments made in its
previous report, the NTC has vastly improved its compliance index.
Furthermore, the reporting requirements have been greatly improved, with
comprehensive reporting on external scrutiny and specific information on
directors.[22]
Commonwealth companies
Australian Rail Track Corporation
3.23
The committee is pleased to note that, following comments in its
previous report, the ARTC has printed its annual report in international B5
size, as required in the Printing standards for documents presented to
Parliament.[23]
3.24
The committee is also pleased to note that the ARTC has included a
compliance index in its annual report. While the inclusion of this index is
not mandatory for the ARTC, the committee finds it immensely helpful when
assessing the ARTC's compliance in reporting requirements.[24]
3.25
The committee notes that the ARTC has especially improved its reporting
on corporate governance, particularly the information provided in relation to
the Board's approach to identifying areas of significant business risk, and
arrangements in place to manage them.[25]
Senator Glenn Sterle
Chair
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page