ALERT DIGEST 1 of 1994
The Committee has considered the following Bills:
Agent-General's Bill
Economic Development (Repeal) Bill
Employment and Training (Amendment) Bill
The Committee Reports on these Bills
Economic Development (Repeal) Bill
Employment and Training (Amendment) Bill
Audit Bill
Financial Management Bill
Consideration is proceeding on the following Bill
Agent-General's Bill
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (REPEAL) BILL
1.1
This Bill was introduced into the Legislative Assembly on 24 November 1993 by The Honourable Phil Gude with The Honourable Pat McNamara.
1.2
This Bill repeals the Economic Development Act 1981. That Act enables the provision of financial assistance and the remission of rates and charges in circumstances that assist the economic development of the State.
1.3 Repeal of Redundant Legislation
The Committee notes the comments in the Second Reading Notes.
"The only provision of the Act that is currently utilised is the power to make grants of assistance in section13(3). The remainder of the Act is redundant.
The repeal of the Act will not in any way impair the Government’s ability to deliver its industry and regional development agendas, which were spelt out in my industry statement of 1 September 1993 and that of my colleague the Minister for Regional Development on 13 October 1993 concerning investment and employment growth in provincial and rural Victoria.
Industry and regional development assistance funding will be maintained and administered through budget appropriation. This funding will be underpinned by detailed guidelines for the administration of the relevant programs.
This repeal is part of the continuing process embarked upon by the Government to review and repeal redundant legislation."
The Committee acknowledges the explanation given and makes no further comment.
1.4 Savings Provision
The Committee notes that Clause 4 is a Savings provision for any loans or grants made under the old Act and makes no further comment.
EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING (AMENDMENT) BILL
2.1
This Bill was introduced into the Legislative Assembly on 24 November 1993 by The Honourable Phil Gude with The Honourable Pat McNamara.
2.2 Repeal Redundant Provisions of the Employment and Training Act 1981
The purpose of this Act is to repeal redundant provisions of the Employment and Training Act 1981.
2.3 Second Reading Notes
The following comments were made in the Second Reading Notes.
"The Employment and Training Act 1981 was passed to address the increase in unemployment of the late 1970’s and the early 1980’s..............The Act established a Ministry of Employment and Training.....The Act established specific mechanisms to co-ordinate the employment and training policies and activities of government...The Act established the responsibilities for employment planning and forecasting which have become the norm for state employment functions, and do not require specific legislative mandate.......This Bill does not propose any changes to those provisions of the Act ....which relate to the payment of rebates to employers of apprentices and trainees......"
The Committee acknowledges the explanation given in the Second Reading Notes and makes no further comment.
2.4 Amending Provisions
Clause 4 amends the old Act to allow for the continued operation of the provisions relating to rebates to employers of apprentices/trainees and updates outdated references to officers responsible for the administration of this activity.
Clause 5 updates the references to officers responsible for rebates and repeals 2 of the 3 heads of power for the making of regulations. The power to make regulations with respect to rebates is retained.
The Committee makes no further comment.
3.1
This Bill provides for the office of the Auditor-General and the audit of public accounts. The Committee reported on this Bill in Alert Digest No. 20, 25 November 1993.
3.2
Clause 15(4) provides that the report by the Auditor-General must be provided to both Houses of Parliament. Previously the report was only provided to the Legislative Assembly.
3.3
The Committee wrote to the Chief Parliamentary Counsel requesting advice as to whether the clause derogates from the financial privilege of the Legislative Assembly or whether the privilege is affected in any way by the requirements of the clause.
3.4
On 10 December 1993, the Chief Parliamentary Counsel responded by letter to the Committee:
"I refer to your letter dated 24 November 1993 about clause 15(4) of this Bill.
Clause 15(4) of the Audit Bill requires the Auditor-General to cause a copy of reports on audits undertaken by the Auditor-General to be transmitted to each House of the Parliament within 7 sitting days.
The provision is a reporting one and does not confer any powers on either House.
The provision complements the usual annual reporting provisions, under which Ministers are required to cause reports of departments and authorities to be laid before each House.
I am not aware of any reason why this provision should be seen as interfering with the financial privileges of the Legislative Assembly. In particular, the provision does not affect the rights of the Legislative Assembly with respect to money Bills or taxing Bills
I note that, under the Commonwealth Audit Act 1901, the Auditor-General is required to transmit reports to each House of the Parliament (section 53)."
4.1
This Bill contains reforms to improve budget sector management and reporting and enhance accountability to the Parliament. More specifically it provides for annual reporting to the Parliament by departments and public sector bodies. The Committee reported on this Bill in Alert Digest 20, 25 November 1993.
4.2
On 2 December 1993, the Committee wrote to the Chairman of the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee:
"The Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee considered the Financial Management Bill on 24 November 1993.
Part 5 relates to the annual statement of financial operations. Clause 25 provides that a statement of financial operations:
"(a) must be prepared in a manner and form approved by the Minister
(b) must present fairly the financial transactions in the Public Bank Account for the financial year;"
Some Members are concerned that the Minister must approve the "manner and form" of the statement and in particular that the statement should be in a form which enables a simple and easy comparison with these statements from other States.
The Committee would appreciate your views on these matters."
4.3
On 16 December 1993 the Chairman of the Committee wrote to the Committee:
"The Committee's views on those matters raised in your letter of 2 December in respect of the Financial Management Bill are detailed below. I hope that this information is of assistance and would be pleased to provide any additional information that you might require.
Statement of Financial Operations must be prepared in a manner and form approved by the Minister.
This does not represent a change from past practice and is not inappropriate given that:
- The Minister is responsible for preparing and explaining the Statement;
- Minimum disclosure requirements are set out in part 5 of the Financial Management Bill; and
- There is a requirement that the Auditor-General forms an opinion on the Statement (the information disclosed by the Minister would need to be adequate to enable the Auditor-General to provide an audit opinion).
Ability to compare Victoria's Annual Statement of Financial Operations with those of other States.
It is not possible at the current time to prepare one set of financial statements which would enable a simple and easy comparison with financial statements in other States due to a lack of consistent accounting practices and reporting conventions.
The Heads of Government, at the May 1991 Premiers' Conference, agreed that annual budget papers would be prepared on a uniform basis to enable comparability between the States. The Commonwealth and all States agreed that the Government Financial Statistics (GFS) format would be used. Although the Finance Statement is one of the Government's major reports to the Parliament for accountability purposes, its format is not consistent with the GFS format used in the Budget Papers or the various approaches adopted in other States. The Department of Treasury has indicated, however, that an immediate priority is to implement GFS reporting.
The GFS format is cash based. It is arguable that there are difficulties in making meaningful comparisons between the States on the basis of cash-based financial information. The Audit Commission recommended that Victoria should move towards the preparation of whole of government consolidated financial statements (general purpose financial statements) based on generally accepted accounting standards and that once this had been achieved, the Finance Statement should be discontinued.
This Committee supports the views expressed by the Audit Commission and will follow up the issues raised by the Commission as part of our pending inquiry into the State's Budget and Financial Management Framework.
Committee Room
2 March 1994
