The NSW auditor-general has reflected on the string of royal commissions, special investigations, reviews and audits that have exposed how the bureaucracy has let down Australian citizens, mustering support for more public servants to learn “the basics” and get them right.
Margaret Crawford has served as the auditor-general in NSW since April 2016, supporting the parliament in holding the state government to account for the effective use of public resources. The insights provided by her office are intended to improve community outcomes.
Despite a number of positive examples of government responding to community needs during the COVID-19 pandemic – where there was no blueprint for an unprecedented event but the actions taken were well-coordinated, evidence-based and agile – Crawford said examples of obviously unlawful practice were rife.
From failures to declare conflict of interest by those involved in major procurement or commercial transactions, to not following procurement guidelines or spending public money without authorisations, to occasions where delegations were either not in place or followed, the shortcomings were undeniable and manifold.
“What do we need to do to get back to the state we aspire to?,” she asked an audience in Canberra.
“There is really no excuse for not getting those basics right.”
Crawford said most of the almost 120 performance audits tabled during her term as auditor-general, most did not live up to the good reviews the public services’ pandemic response enjoyed.
Grant programs in particular stood out as scenarios where public servants were found to succumb to the temptation of “colluding with ministers to skew outcomes for political purpose”, she said.
“Of course, performance audits are targeted at areas where we think there is a performance gap […] but even in that context, I have been shocked by the failings our audits identified over the last few years.
“I thought our public service should be able to get the basics right. I thought that, at the very least, we would put in place the fundamental processes, systems and controls that support good governance and integrity.
“But audit after audit reported that records were not kept, or could not be found, and where they were found, they were sometimes over-classified to delay and prevent scrutiny,” she said.
Crawford made her remarks in an address for IPAA’s annual Garran Oration last week.
The auditor-general explored the bureaucracy’s collective desire for governments to actively seek out agency advice, well ahead of the announcement of major decisions.
It was with evidence-based, objective and impartial advice that balanced the perspective of stakeholders that the most democratic political decisions could be made, she said.
“Political flair and detachment [as exhibited by Sir Robert Garran GCMG QC] … it’s worth us reflecting on these qualities in the current environment.
“The art of being very live to the politics, while remaining objective and impartial in framing advice to government,” Crawford said.
“As citizens, we want to know our government is competent, reliable and honest. We have the right to expect that government puts public interest ahead of political interest – that it listens and strives to create the conditions for us all to prosper.
“Government should be fair, consistent and transparent – and in doing so, ensure our democratic system is protected,” she said.
Crawford added public servants should be focused on offering advice that was fiscally responsible and committed to the efficient, effective and prudent use of resources – and especially not biased towards or in support of a predetermined outcome such as the appalling example of robodebt.
“We want to work in organisations that weigh how decisions made may impact members of the community in different ways, and we clearly communicate those impacts to our senior managers and political masters,” Crawford said.
“When decisions are made, we collectively ensure that good government decisions are in place to deliver the outcome sought – foremost, we work in departments that understand the legal framework that they exist within. Clear accountabilities are established, and delegations and authorisations are complied with,” she said.
The auditor-general also stressed the necessity of public service capability which knew how to identify, manage and escalate risks, as well as impeccable record-keeping.
“We manage accurate and complete records, especially records of key decisions and the rationale behind them. And we report transparently on progress and measures of success.”
“We declare and manage conflict of interests, and protect against fraud and corruption risks,” she said.
The talk followed a Q&A with APS commissioner Dr Gordon de Brouwer, who described Crawford’s track record of success guiding public sector agencies as “distinguished” and one of his own personal heroes.
“In each [public service role] Margaret’s focus has been to transform and improve performance to benefit people and the community. Margaret is an inspiring leader and she is a trusted partner of colleagues across government, non-government organisations and industry bodies, and an authoritative adviser to the parliament, government, ministers and boards,” Dr de Brouwer said.
“Her most recent experience has further enhanced her knowledge of governance, integrity and assurance systems that build trust in public institutions.”
In conversation with the commissioner, Crawford discussed how agencies and departments could best respond to audit recommendations and encouraged bureaucrats to think about these findings as a gift or opportunity to be better.
“There’s a bit of an onus on audit offices to get [recommendations] right and ensure they are practical and workable. It is pretty tough, I know, on agencies because sometimes there are so many reviews and such a big body of recommendations to be followed up,” Crawford said.
“It is important to put in place the governance arrangements to make sure you do follow up. Not to say you have to implement everything precisely, because the world does change. But [departments] should find a way of taking on board what the findings really were and what needs to be done.”
In terms of sanctions or repercussions for NSW public servants involved in the work being audited, Crawford also noted that historically the consequences were mixed. In her view, it was still the case that some public servants who stood up for their principles and values and pushed back could face reprisals from their ministers or other political actors.
“Equally, there are people who we’ve called out in our audits for failures who we rapidly see being promoted – so that’s the other side of consequences,” Crawford said.
“I think it’s fair to say that you don’t often see people who call out bad behaviours being promoted and I think that’s something that needs to change.”
:
Any feedback or news tips? Here’s where to contact the relevant team.