??????????????????
One, with the power of Parliament, seeking legislative support
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
The Australian government is a parliamentary system, main characteristics of parliamentary system is the administrative legislation (parliament) must be responsible for parliament, and assessment on the behavior of the government administrative agencies and their performance requires a series of institutional arrangement. Performance auditing thoughts can just meet this demand, and in particular shows it can better report to Parliament the government's public management accountability potential.
1974???H.C.Coombs???????????????????????RCAGA?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????Coombs??????????????????????????“????”?“????”?????????????????????????????????????
By 1974, H.C.Coombs served as chairman of the Australian government management Royal Commission (RCAGA) was established, the first committee of the federal bureaucracy were extensively examined, and pointed out that because of the difference of cabinet members, political background because of the bureaucracy of government departments is no longer a neutral mechanism, and management in the field of many ministers and bureaucracy responsible are not good to Parliament due diligence. Hope that through the performance audit arrangement of this system to check the public management department is responsible for human performance and performance. Strengthening government accountability of public management. According to the Australian national conditions, Coombs clearly, performance audit should not rationality problem relates to the policy itself, he will "efficiency audit" and "performance audit" separately, the former is carried out by the audit organ, the latter due to political issues, from the cabinet and the prime minister, chief of staff to complete the.
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????“??”?????????????????????????????????????????“??”???????Coombs???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Although the Ministry of Finance and other strong opposition to the auditing organ performance review of the right, and claims that some policy issues are difficult to distinguish transaction and management, but also to minister to double the "suspicion" is wrong. But Australian Prime Minister and most senior cabinet members agree on the need to "review and supervision" of public management process and behavior. The Coombs Committee ultimately recommended to Parliament the auditing organ authorized to implement economic and performance audit law, audit institutions authorized to check the implementation of government policy, and not involved in evaluating the rationality of the policy itself. Performance audit mainly in three aspects: the first is for parliament, government authorities, the ministers of the fiduciary responsibility; second is to taxpayers, to ensure that taxpayer funds are properly used; the third is the auditee, to provide more efficient management and use of resources, advice and assistance policy.
1979?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????JCPA???????????????HRSCE????????????????????
In 1979, the performance audit of the final written authorization audit the amended law "". The revised "Audit Law" entrusts to the auditing of government public management institutions to implement the performance audit of the power, but the performance audit of the State-Owned Company must be Australian Prime Minister agreed or request. At the same time also requested the special audit institutions must provide the performance audit report to Parliament and to solicit the views of the auditee. Another important achievement of this one "Audit Law" revision is, set up a joint committee on public accounting in Parliament (JCPA) and public spending Representatives Committee (HRSCE) performance audit report to review Federal Audit submitted.
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????“?????”????????????????????“???????????”??????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Have been authorized to carry out performance audit of the legislation, the Federal Audit Office soon established a multi-disciplinary, multi skilled work experience and professional background of staff performance audit team, of which more than half of the staff is the introduction of new Federal Audit office. The performance audit is the main method of early "negotiation and discussion", and in the Federal Audit Office inside, the performance audit as "one of the effective means to contribute to the improvement of government public management". The Congress will performance audit report separate filing, cover single row, as distinguished from the financial audit report. But, about the performance audit effort just started soon attracted the auditee, government departments and even a parliamentary censure. But in general, the performance audit in Australia started or exciting and full of hope.
The Federal Audit Office hope can take the initiative to provide Congress with more high-quality, relevant government public management "performance" of information. The potential pressure on public management services for the first time the performance audit also revealed new functions may exist. Parliament has placed high hopes on performance audit, performance audit evaluation report can hope extensively for public administration management.
????????“?????”?????
Two, the difficult exploration, from the beginning of "short, frequency, fast" project
?????????“??”????????????1979-1990????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
After a brief early "excited", reason restored quickly. 1979-1990 is an Australian performance audit difficult exploration period, in order to reply to the prejudice and even hostility, Australian National Audit Office to actively adjust, served as auditor general advance wave upon wave, difficult groping, continue to forge ahead, the final by virtue of their own performance auditing performance to win the society's understanding, in the establishment of performance auditing status of the journey to lay a solid foundation.
????“?????”?????
(a) start from "short, frequency, fast" project
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Craik??????“???????????????”??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????——???????????
About the management of public funds or the performance problems are inevitable, but many government agencies are not used to reflect on their own, but the auditor arrival prejudice or hostility. Although the federal auditor general Craik insisted that the assessment on the "Audit Law revision and performance audit team work" requires a longer time, but the criticism is coming up soon, and continuously, the criticism and suspicion mainly involves: performance audit recommendations are appropriate, reasonable, and the relevant professional audit process value in itself -- especially the report timeliness.
???1980????????????????????????349600???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Such as the management audit began on the Australian Postal Union counter service in 1980 at a total cost of $349600, after four years time, had to give up. This failure is largely because of the Federal Audit Office cannot accurately define the scope of the audit, the proper implementation of project management and to select appropriate audit, audit team's lack of experience is also an important reason. The responsibility for the performance audit of the interrupt and the consequent Public Accounting Committee for the improvement of the new image of the performance audit and the Federal Audit Office this new mission status consolidated very bad. But the audit personnel not discouraged.
Craik????Keith Brigden???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Brigden????????????????????????????????????Brigden?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????“???”?“??????”????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Brigden???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Brigden???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????1984?6??12??????5?“?????”???????????????????Brigden????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????? 1985?John Monaghan???Brigden???????????????????????????????????????????????“??????????????????????”?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Craik succession is Keith Brigden, although he to the performance audit of the understanding and its predecessor is obviously different, but equally committed to promoting performance audit. For the source capture performance audit failure and troubleshooting a variety of possible interference, Brigden sent its predecessor established performance audit team, and the staff as the original department. In contrast, Brigden pay more attention to the performance of audit method, he presided over the formulation of the performance audit and performance audit program planning framework. The first is the feasibility study, followed by the performance audit focus, scope, time, personnel, review processes and resources, finally, notify the audited entity. The first results of the audit is a "controversial draft" and "preliminary audit report", the last is the official management manual. By feedback as the final audit report audit unit reference. Formally audit report shall also seek the auditee management advice. Brigden paid special attention to those boundaries clear, clear objectives of small scale performance audit, performance audit aims to confirm the performance audit of small, exercise performance audit team, accumulated experience for performance audit, performance audit has the value found, gradually establish and strengthen the performance audit of the confidence, win the society and auditee's understanding and support the performance audit. Brigden uses its own tax administration was appointed chief executive of second, the tax administration of the internal working inside the edge of out of interest and thinking, and began a series of tax administration audit. From 1984 June to December carried out performance audit 5 "short, frequency, fast". Many federal auditors think: the work of Brigden, makes some old pose as government departments (such as the Ministry of Finance) can no longer escape performance audit review, therefore, is a performance audit status has important milepost established. Also somebody thinks this is to break a start centralization relations. Joint Committee on the public accounting took note of these reports can improve management, increase government resources and its effective use. (two) continue to accumulate new experience in 1985 John Monaghan to succeed: Brigden, performance audit work he continued to promote the Federal Audit Office, and to achieve breakthroughs in many areas. Joint Committee on the public accounting about this time that "without a doubt, the Parliament are anxiously awaiting the formation of" performance audit report, and the suggestions to improve public management, save the audit cost, increasing government spending and overcome the bad management, with particular reference to the performance audit. During this period, with the continuous accumulation of experience of Australian Federal Audit Office performance audit and method, began to participate in international exchange and approved the preliminary, and provide the related training from Asia and the Middle East countries auditors.
??????????????????????????????????????52??????1988??????????????????? ???????John Traylor??????????????????????????????????????????????12?????????????????????????????
In general, this period of performance audit in Australia has made considerable progress, the 52 performance audit records of the Joint Committee on the public accounting (completed in 1988) by parliamentary criticism has disappeared. To John. Taylor (John Traylor) as the auditor general, performance audit has made great development. Results are: gradually clear and narrow the scope of the audit; audit report, completed in 12 months; the Federal Audit Office began to organize all kinds of performance audit methods and archiving; improvement
Three, for the Congress and the auditee's support, speaking with the fact, the final establishment of performance auditing status
1990???????????????????????????????????????????????????????20??80?????90????????????????????????????????????????????????90?????????????????????????????????????????????
Since 1990 is the key period of performance audit in Australia gradually accepted by the public, it was ultimately established in the status and influence of the period of performance audit in australia. From twentieth Century to the mid 80's to the early 90's, the relationship between the Federal Audit and audit is not too close, the Federal Audit Office also has been questioned in the haze. However, since the end of 90, many of the problems are gradually resolved, especially the Australian Federal Audit Office made acknowledged achievements in performance audit.
???????????????????????
(a) Joint Committee on the public accounting plays an important role.
1989?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????“??????????????????”?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????6???????????????????????????????????????????????????
The Joint Commission in 1989 launched a public accounting of extensive investigation, the Federal Parliament the government audit opinions, the survey results and fully affirmed the performance audit of the parliament, the importance and necessity of endow the Federal Audit Office performance audit, performance audit Council also think is valuable, but the performance audit is often subject to financial capital supply the phenomenon was questioned. In view of this unreasonable situation, Joint Committee on the public accounting advice should increase the development of performance audit of capital investment, and make the regular audit is equally important. The report argues that performance audit is a "are still need quite a long time the Department" grow slowly, suggested a separate compilation performance audit budget. In addition, Joint Committee on the public accounting praised employ various professionals involved in the performance audit practice. Joint Commission for the investigation of public accounting that should shorten the performance audit cycle (about 6 months is appropriate), the main results of performance audit should report to Congress twice a year. But the most important suggestion from this survey is should be revised "Audit Law".
1990?10???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????200????1988—1989??????????????17%????????1989—1990???????14%.???????????????????????????????????????????1990—1991????????????44%??????????????90???????27%???20????????????????37%.?2001???????????????????50%
In 1990 October, the Federal Audit Office third times to become the subject of investigation, the independent auditors are carried out on the office of the Comptroller and big three audit responsibilities (financial audit, performance audit and performance audit service). On the performance audit, conclusion and recommendations should use standard methods, preparation of more detailed audit plan, and has a variety of skills, more variety of professional and academic background of the members of the audit team to improve the efficiency of performance auditing. In this regard, the Federal Audit Office agreed to the recommendations for improvement of the performance audit basis. Despite the obstacles from all sides, but the Joint Committee on the public accounting recommendations succeeded in forcing the government to increase the investment of Federal Audit office. The government agreed to a year to the Federal Audit Office supplemental appropriation of $2000000. 1988 - 1989 fiscal year Federal Audit Office budget for performance audit in 17%, and from 1989 to 1990, this proportion was only 14%. with increasing government funding Federal Audit Office and improve its efficiency, the Federal Audit Office has more resources into the performance auditing. In 1990 - 1991, the Federal Audit Office will be 44% of the total budget for the performance audit of the project, this figure in the 90's was reduced to 27%, but in the last few decades of the twentieth Century, this proportion rose to about 37%. in 2001, expenditure performance audit has accounted for 50% of the total budget Federal Audit Office
???????????????????????????????????????????????
(two) actively strive for the understanding and support unit. The Federal Audit Office, and was the relationship between audit unit is always a difficult problem.
Unlike the financial audit, performance audit quality is very important in the audited units with the findings and results of the audit of the audited units to work, strive for the Federal Audit Office understanding and trust is key to the success of the performance audit. In twentieth Century 80, the Federal Audit Department and the audit record of cooperation has been less than ideal. In order to solve this problem, the early 90's, the Federal Audit Office is mainly taken three measures, first, improve and strictly implement the audit plan. In order to further improve the entity to be audited and the public service, the federal agency to carry out some special audit of the audit, and these topics are usually society and the parties concerned, not as early as, alternated auditors to audit the state public sector, in pursuit of the audit project in the topic and select the unit of simple "balance". Secondly, careful selection of auditors, the different professional background, subjects, different work experience of staff together to carry out performance audit, performance audit is beneficial to enhance confidence, and win the social recognition of the audit team. In addition, can also employ the professional consultants to participate in performance audit team, providing professional advice to the performance audit and help. Or, according to the performance audit process, also invited by some members of the audit units to provide assistance. Thirdly, preferential audit case and practice and summing up the experience, and audit methods valuable summarize and file, as the future performance audit guidance. Although these measures at first effect is not ideal, but the days and months multiplying effect, finally revealed. With the deep going of the performance audit, audit and audited between our cooperation has been strengthened. To improve the service for the transformation of idea, the Federal Audit Office from the beginning of the 1995 - 1996 years, all included in the audit plan audit units to opinion polls, analysts and commissioned an independent to complete. The poll also incidental found such an obvious trend: that is, the auditee is widely considered Federal Audit Office already from "I caught" mentality to provide "value added" service for the units being audited, and the Federal Audit Office customers are from one into two, namely, the Parliament and the now the audited units.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????1997?12????“??????”??????????????????1998—1999??????????29???????????1999——2000????????????15????20??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
At present, although the final decision whether to audit the Federal Audit is still long, but many of the auditee active request Federal Audit Office performance audit of its has begun, and in the process of auditing actively cooperate. Performance audit and are members of the requirements. For example, in 1997 December submitted a "Minister of tourism rights" performance audit report is the prime minister should be for; 1998 - 1999 annual federal Audit Office received a total of 29 copies of the formal application of performance audit, performance audit of 1999 -- 2000 annual formal application 15. After 20 years of practice, the law authorizes the performance audit of the Federal Audit Office and master the performance audit skills has gradually been parliament, government and other approved by the audit unit.
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????1981????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????20??80???????????????????????1989—1990???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????“????????????”??“??????????????????”?
(three) to quantify the performance audit of returns. For a long time, the Federal Audit Office trying to express intention is: the main goal of performance audit is not saving the audit cost, but to encourage and support the government public management department to improve management, namely, better planning, more economic, more efficient use of scarce resources, and finally realize the value. The long dispute about the performance audit also includes performance measurement, which is a developing concept. Earlier, the Parliament and the auditee mainly focus on performance audit may bring benefits, while the Federal Audit Office but not willing to evaluate the benefit. Public spending in 1981 Congress Committee was especially proposed the audit organs should try to quantify the audit recommendations income requirements, and doubted the Federal Audit Office may exaggerate to the hard difficulty. Even so, about how to measure performance audit income or made some progress. In twentieth Century 80 time metaphase, the Federal Audit Office to report the performance audit of the cost; in the 1989 - 1990 fiscal year, and a big step forward, in addition to measure the audit cost, also began to report the audit (potential) income. The calculation method of the Federal Audit Office has tried the performance audit income mainly has three aspects, one is the quantity of audit recommendations, the second is the performance audit cost savings, the third is to adopt the auditee audit recommendations (usually with acceptable percentage to total proposal number to represent), which later it was further improve "performance audit project input-output ratio", namely "project audit cost and audit income ratio".
Is generally believed that the judgment performance audit will help the government public management improvement and provide value-added services, the key is to look at the quality of audit recommendations and accepted. A successful performance audit, most of its audit recommendations should be adopted by audit unit, and one by one to be implemented. Thus, people noticed that since twentieth Century 90 time metaphase of about 90% of the performance audit recommendations have been adopted. But there are still some audit recommendations were not accepted, for example, in 1999 December, the Royal Navy submarine project a total of $5000000000 in audit report, the Defense Department report on about half of the recommended again questioned. In 1993 December, the Ministry of Finance on the Australian government on credit card after the announcement of audit institutions audit, and audit unit deteriorated to the worst degree.
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????10???????????????????????????????????????????????30?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
At present, about the performance audit, although there are still audit methods, and the auditee, the relationship between resources and performance audit itself evaluation and other aspects of the dispute, but the government ministers and the auditees feedback on performance audit opinions and suggestions in general is very positive. For example, in the past 10 years, the Ministry of defense of a series of performance audit report has been made aware of the Department of Defense Minister lack of management, and to improve the. Can say, in the past 30 years, with the deepening of performance audit in Australia, has been urging the public to recognize the Federal Audit Office as independent advice and comments the existing role is of great importance to.
???20??90????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????1992—1993??????????????“?????”?“?????”?????“????”?“????”??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
In short, the 90's of the twentieth Century is Australia's most significant achievements in the development of performance audit period, and this first set the Federal Audit Office internal structure adjustment. Performance audit functions re done by independent agencies, 1992 - 1993 Federal Audit Office established independent "performance audit" and "financial audit department", are responsible for the "performance audit" and "financial audit". At this time, the performance audit and financial audit on an equal footing the can. This largely means, more resources, especially the management strength, must be tilted to the performance audit. This internal setup pattern continues, the Australian Federal Audit Office set up four business bureau, two engaged in financial audit, the two engaged in performance audit.
???????????????1989???????????????????????????????????????????????????????1992—1993??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????1997???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????50%??????????????????????????????????? ?20???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????“?????”??????????
In order to improve the quality of service for parliament, beginning in the mid 1989, the Audit Commission to provide a series of new independent report to parliament, and to those important performance audit project audit findings and recommendations detailed explanation. 1992 - 1993, in order to further improve the service to meet the needs of the Federal Parliament, the Audit Commission specifically for members and related personnel conducted a questionnaire survey, and on this basis the adjustment. Each performance audit report in the Australian auditing organs provide is accompanied by a concise manual, main characteristics and audit of the audit findings. In 1997, the Australian Federal Audit Office again to the polls, the situation is radically changed, although think communication mechanism Federal Audit Office and parliament needs further improvement, but the Federal Audit Office is considered to be one of the reliable sources of information of the parliament, of which about 50% of the respondents believe that the positive change of government performance audit report public management plays an important role in. By the end of twentieth Century, about the problems and difficulties encountered early performance audit gradually solved, performance audit and eventually proved to public management is helpful to the improvement of the Australian government. In fact, the Australian Federal Audit Office entrusted to the performance audit is successful. The Federal . The Federal Audit Office conforms to the requirements of the development of the times, based on the correlation before and after work, to adapt to the need of the development of the Australian political, economic and social situation, timely update of the "product and service", to enhance the value of the service.
[????]
Reference.
[1]John Wanna?Christine?Chew Ng.From Accounting t0 Account- ability?a Centenary History of the Australian National Audit Office[M].2001.
[1]John Wanna, Ng.From Accounting t0 Account- ability:a Christine?Chew Centenary History of the Australian National Audit Office[M].2001.
[2] Audit Department of foreign affairs. Foreign performance audit [M]. Beijing: China Economy Publishing House, 2003
[3]???????????????[M].?????????????2004.
[3] Bao Guoming. Foreign performance audit methods and case [M]. Beijing: China Economy Publishing House, 2004