Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Leadership recommended

PA Wellington

Parliament’s Public Expenditure Select Committee recommended more than two months ago that the Government urgently give the Treasury responsibility for over-all leadership in the development of financial management systems in Government departments.

The former Auditor-Gen-eral, Mr Fred Shailes, last year laid the blame for slow progress on reforms at the Treasury’s door, referring to a “lack of positive leadership at senior level in the Treasury at crucial stages.” The Public Expenditure Committee also canvassed the issues of reforming financial management for Government departments in its 1983 report. The report was presented to Parliament in the dying stages of last year’s session, but because copies are yet to be printed it has not been widely available. A lack of effective management systems in the Ministry of Works has been blamed for errors in costing several South Island irrigation schemes, leading to the transfer of three senior staff from the Ministry’s Dunedin office.

The Treasury this week released 11 confidential reports to show it had long been critical of the economics for the Maniototo scheme, where the most dramatic cost overruns happened. The chairman of the Public Expenditure Committee, and member of Parliament for Tarawera, Mr lan McLean, said yesterday that recent reports of the committee “indicated it is not satisfied with the progress made on improvement to management systems,” although some improvements had been made in some departments. His committee reported, “It has been difficult to discern progress on strategic issues from the Treasury reports which detail progress on feasibility studies, pilot studies, questionnaires, and departmental visits.”

“The rate of progress depends on the commitment by the Treasury to the task. Progress also depends on whether the Treasury can provide professional leadership in accountancy. “The division of responsibility between the Treasury, the Audit Office, and the

State Services Commission is unsatisfactory in that no one department can be held accountable for standards achieved.”

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19840224.2.32

Bibliographic details

Press, 24 February 1984, Page 4

Word Count
316

Leadership recommended Press, 24 February 1984, Page 4

Leadership recommended Press, 24 February 1984, Page 4

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert