Roles, Responsibilities of PAC Clerks: Follow-up from Inquiries

ANTHONY STADDON

SADCOPAC/EAAPAC CLERK TRAININGKAMPALA, UGANDA

MAY 9-10, 2013

Follow-up• Across the Commonwealth PAC recommendations are normally

accepted by the government. The crucial issue, however, is that of implementation.

• Follow-up is an essential part of the PAC’s work as it enables the accountability loop to be completed.

• If neglected, the reputation of the PAC and SAI will decline and public servants will not appreciate the importance and consequences of PAC hearings.

• Implementation of PAC recommendations is one measure of the committee's usefulness and effectiveness.

• Many PACs will issue media releases at the time a report is tabled. This can be effective to pressurise governments to implement recommendations.

Following up on Inquiry Recommendations

Timeframe for Executive responses to PAC reports/recommendations (formal or in practice)

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

IRL

JRY

NRL

SCD

UK

WLS

Average

PA

C J

uris

dict

ion

Number of Weeks

Reporting to Parliament – British Islands

Monitoring Implementation: British Isles Experience

• Virtually every PAC reported that processes were in place to monitor and follow-up the implementation of government responses (mix of formal and informal mechanisms).

• Some issues in the UK are considered annually (tax credits, defence procurement) and departmental annual reports now have a section listing progress on recommendations.

• Scotland has departed from previous Westminster practice by scrutinizing performance both at a given point of time and over many years.

• PACs are also increasingly exploring recurring themes, arising from previous inquiries, through “thematic” reports as well as the cost implications and implementation of legislation.

Follow-up: wider experience

• In Australia and New Zealand, only two (of 10) jurisdictions report that governments are not formally required to respond to PAC recommendations.

• In Canada only 3 of the 14 PACs have developed formal mechanisms to monitor recommendations above and beyond the follow-up done by the AG.– However, follow-up hearings with departments are not uncommon.

• In many jurisdictions it is the job of the PAC Clerk to establish and maintain a follow-up schedule.

• Another tactic is for the PAC to send a follow-up letter at the end of the year to those departments and entities which have been audited asking for a progress report.

• In some jurisdictions (e.g. Nepal and Jersey) the PAC sub-committees normally monitor the government’s actions taken.

Monitoring Implementation: Good Practice

• In the Australian Capital Territory government agencies are required to disclose the status of government accepted PAC recommendations in their annual reports.

• In the Federal Canadian Parliament, research staff from the Library of Parliament monitors written govt responses and the implementation of PAC recommendations through periodic monitoring reports.

• The Ghanaian Parliament has established Audit Implementation Committees in all its Ministries/agencies and this is supported by the Audit Implementation Act.

Monitoring Implementation: British Columbia (Canada)

• About 12 months after an audited organisation’s appearance before the PAC, the AG’s office will request a progress report (usually 1 month timeframe).

• The AG reviews the information and issues a report to the PAC giving his/her opinion on the status of implementation.

• The PAC may request that representatives of the audited organization appear before the committee to provide further information or that further information be provided to the committee in written form.