Parliamentary Audit Committees – How to make them work effectively

Parliamentary Audit Committees – How to make them work effectively Rob Prideaux Director of Corporate Affairs, UK National Audit Office Meeting of Representatives of Supreme Audit Institutions, Parliamentary Audit Committees and Ministries of Finance of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia 17-18 October 2006

Key success factors • An effective constitutional framework of public scrutiny • A close working relationship with the audit office • Productive evidence sessions • A focus on policy implementation • Remaining non-partisan and non-political • Authority and influence

An effective constitutional framework of public scrutiny • Statute • Independence of C&AG and NAO • Remit and powers of the Committee • Convention • PAC as NAO reporting route to Parliament • Opposition Chairman • Agreed reports

The accountability process Government requests and Parliament grant funds C&AG examines spending and reports to Parliament Government response PAC session and report

A close working relationship with the audit office Benefits for the National Audit Office • Focuses us on a clear parliamentary customer • Raises awareness of NAO’s work in Parliament and in Government • Provides a support base in Parliament – NAO funding & reputation • Can make ‘principled’ arguments for enhanced accountability and wider C&AG/ NAO access

A close working relationship with the audit office Benefits to the Committee • Enables PAC to cover a high volume & variety of topics • Provides expertise and continuity • Gives PAC a solid evidence base • Allows the Committee to focus on performance issues and future action • Provides a variety of practical support

NAO support to the Public Accounts Committee • Hearings twice weekly on NAO reports • 50-60 PAC reports a year based on NAO report and oral evidence • Study programme derived by NAO • feed PAC interests into programme • consult PAC on programme annually • undertake work at PAC’s request

Wider NAO support to PAC Chairman and members • Advice on topical issues & correspondence • Publication and media support to the Chairman – press statements, briefings, feature articles • Bi-annual PAC Debate & other speeches or interjections in the House of Commons • Draft speeches to be delivered at other events

Productive evidence sessions • Clear and simple messages • NAO support for hearings • Good PAC witnesses • Preparing authoritative PAC reports to achieve impact • Effective follow-up

Clear and simple messages • Short reports • 20 page limit • Single page executive summary • Clear headline messages • Good use of graphics and illustrations • Avoidance of technical language • A paragraph providing an overall conclusion on value for money

NAO support for hearings • Produce NAO report close to when PAC session will be • Prepare written brief and detailed lines of questioning linked directly to the NAO report • Orally brief the Chairman and Members before a hearing • Attend the evidence session • C&AG as a witness • Team in support

Good PAC witnesses • Witnesses are senior and relevant (normally departmental Accounting Officers) • Witnesses are well-briefed • “A witness is bound to answer all questions which the committee sees fit to put to him or her" • The witness must respect the process • The witness should not be arrogant or overly defensive

Preparing authoritative PAC reports to achieve impact • Audit team prepares a draft report for the Committee • Based on the evidence session • Focuses on issues of concern to MPs • Teams attend when MPs consider the report • Report makes detailed and “SMART” recommendations

Effective follow-up • Government responds formally to PAC reports in a ‘Treasury Minute’ • NAO provides advice on the Treasury Minute response • NAO follows up as appropriate • follow-up reports • briefing to PAC • monitoring

A focus on policy implementation • PAC examines how public money is spent • Avoids discussing the merits of policy objectives • Enables a pan-government perspective – what works well in policy implementation? • Leads to impact and substantive improvements in public services

Remaining non-partisan and non-political • Cross-party membership, led by a member of the opposition • By putting aside political differences, PAC is taken seriously by all • Prepared to be hard-hitting • Offers praise where it’s due, especially for innovation and well-considered risk-taking

Managing the risk of the Committee becoming “politicised” • As political debate becomes more administrative (eg the efficiency agenda), PAC’s work assumes greater prominence and media attention • This increases the profile of the Committee and it attracts more prominent politicians BUT • Increases the risk that discussion divides along party lines • NAO must manage this and guard against political points being made through the Committee, such as by promoting balanced media briefing

Authority and influence • Both NAO and PAC have a reputation for authoritative research, findings and conclusions • Helped by non-partisan nature and focus on policy implementation • Draws on the expertise of 800 professionally-qualified staff • A serious test for senior public servants

Beneficial impact • Takes a broad view and makes recommendations that cut across government • Scrutinises the whole delivery chain (private and voluntary sector partners, contractors, and service providers) • Produces influential overview reports: • Improving the Delivery of Government IT Projects (2000) • Improving Public Services for Older People (2004) • Delivering High Quality Public Services For All (2006) • Achieving Value for Money in the Delivery of High Quality Public Services (2006) • Over 94% of PAC recommendations accepted by Government • £555 million saved by NAO/ PAC work in 2005

Parliamentary Audit Committees – How to make them work effectively

Parliamentary Audit Committees – How to make them work effectively

Presentation Transcript