Gun Buy Back Scheme - The Australian National Audit Office
Gun Buy Back Scheme - The Australian National Audit Office
Gun Buy Back Scheme - The Australian National Audit Office
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>The</strong> Attorney-General’s Department advised the ANAO that this<br />
arose because their Financial Management Branch reported the<br />
total amount of funds advanced to the States, while OLEC’s reports<br />
to the Attorney-General focussed on the total amount paid by the<br />
States in compensation. This indicates that monitoring of program<br />
expenditure was undertaken at an appropriately senior level.<br />
<strong>Audit</strong> and acquittal<br />
3 76 For the purposes of accountability, it is important that<br />
arrangements for audit and acquittal are clearly defined and<br />
understood by relevant parties. In its planning advice, the ANAO<br />
advised the OLEC that States should be required to provide, on<br />
completion of the scheme, a final audited return detailing total<br />
amounts received and expended, supported by a reconciliation of<br />
firearms acquired, paid for and destroyed.<br />
3 77 At the time of this audit in mid-1997, arrangements for the final<br />
audit and acquittal of State compensation payments for firearms<br />
surrender transactions had not been clearly defined by the<br />
Attorney-General’s Department. <strong>The</strong> Department advised the<br />
ANAO that it was the Department’s expectation that relevant State<br />
<strong>Audit</strong>ors-General were ensuring compliance. However, the<br />
ANAO’s discussions with representatives of those offices indicated<br />
that, with the exception of Tasmania, there was no formal<br />
involvement by State <strong>Audit</strong>ors-General in the acquittance of State<br />
expenditure of buy-back funds. <strong>The</strong> ANAO concluded that specific<br />
arrangements for independent audit and acquittal differ between<br />
States but were not clearly known to the Attorney-General's<br />
Department.<br />
Conclusion<br />
3 78 Although there were weaknesses in internal management control<br />
and there was a need to amend the 1996 Act, payments to the<br />
States were made legally. <strong>The</strong> Attorney-General’s Department<br />
managed payments to the States efficiently and effectively.<br />
However, the ANAO found that there was scope to clarify<br />
arrangements for final audit and acquittal of State expenditure of<br />
gun buy-back funds.<br />
Recommendation No.1<br />
3 79 <strong>The</strong> ANAO recommends that in order to ensure accountability for<br />
the scheme, the Attorney-General's Department clarifies<br />
<strong>The</strong> <strong>Gun</strong> <strong>Buy</strong>-<strong>Back</strong> <strong>Scheme</strong> 59