Get Involved - Parliament

Government Sector Audit and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2022

Published on: November 2022

Record: HANSARD-1323879322-129444

Government Sector Audit and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2022

Second Reading Debate

Debate resumed from 9 November 2022.

Mr ANOULACK CHANTHIVONG (Macquarie Fields) (20:37:33):Quadrennial Review of the Audit Office of New South Wales 2022

I lead for the Opposition in debate on the Government Sector Audit and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. I indicate that the Opposition will not oppose the bill but will move amendments arising from constructive discussions we have had with our colleagues on the Independent benches and discussions in the upper House. The bill amends the Government Sector Audit Act and the Local Government Act 1993 to extend the performance audit powers of the Auditor‑General and address the Public Accounts Committee's . An important feature of this bill is the implementation of follow the dollar powers that will allow the Auditor‑General to extend performance audits to non‑public sector entities who receive public funds or other resources to deliver services or perform functions on behalf of agencies or local councils. The Auditor‑General can assess if a non‑public sector entity is achieving the purpose for which public resources were provided and whether those resources are being used efficiently, economically and in compliance with the law.

It was concerning to read that the New South Wales Audit Office's independence under current legislation was ranked eighth out of 10 when compared to other audit offices in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. Even more concerning, that ranking had dropped from fifth in 2009 and from seventh in 2013. In fact, the quadrennial review found there is "insufficient protection of the independence of the Auditor‑General". The provisions of the bill, which amend section 27B of the Audit Act to establish the Auditor‑General as an independent officer of the Parliament, are warmly welcomed.

I now turn to the provisions of the bill that deal with the publication and disclosure of confidential information. The bill removes provisions in the audit Act and the Local Government Act so that the Auditor‑General has the power to access confidential information, such as Cabinet documents. The Opposition's proposed amendments will preclude the Auditor‑General from including information in a report that would be contrary to the public interest. The Opposition's amendments might be worthwhile considering, as they set out clear reasons for the non-disclosure of information that would be contrary to the public interest by the Auditor‑General.

The Opposition also will speak with our Independent colleagues to ensure we amend the Government Sector Finance Act to bring forward the budget half-yearly review in the lead‑up to a State election. Under current legislation, the Treasurer can delay the release of the half-yearly review to no later than 10 February of an election year. The Government can give itself an extension past the usual 31 December deadline in an election year. My colleagues in the upper House will certainly speak to our Independent colleagues to ensure that our amendments will remove the Treasurer's ability to delay the release of the half-yearly review. Once again, NSW Labor is focused on transparency and accountability. The Opposition's amendments are in the best interests of the New South Wales taxpayer. The Government should not use an election as an excuse to hide the status of the books. If anything, increased transparency around the budget is needed in the lead-up to an election so that everybody knows where we stand. I hope the Government supports the amendments in the upper House in favour of accountability, but we will wait and see.

Quadrennial Review of the Audit Office of New South Wales 2022

As I have said, the bill confers follow the dollar powers on the Auditor-General that will broaden existing performance audit functions in relation to State government agencies and local councils. I know taxpayers and ratepayers across the State will welcome the increased powers of the Auditor-General to ensure that public resources are being spent appropriately. I am sure the Government will probably want to give itself a pat on the back for introducing this bill and giving the Auditor-General the follow the dollar powers. But let us not forget that this Government has been in power now for almost 12 years and only now has decided to act, with another election just around the corner. In fact, the 2017 made clear that New South Wales was the last jurisdiction in the country to implement the follow the dollar powers. The 2017 review had a very specific recommendation:

A 'follow-the-dollar' mandate is required in order to restore the oversight that the Auditor-General has traditionally had over public spending. An update to the Act would be a practical response to the contemporary concept of 'commissioning' where government services are increasingly provided by not-for-profit and private providers on behalf of government.

What did the Government do to address the issue five years ago? Absolutely nothing. Just imagine if the follow the dollar powers had been implemented sooner. What would the Auditor-General have found? We can look to the Government's track record over recent years—exhibit one, funding rorts and pork-barrelling. Where do I even start? In 2020 the Government distributed almost $180 million to communities affected by the 2019‑20 Black Summer bushfires without an open application process. Of the 71 funded projects, only three were not in Government‑held electorates. Now let me look at the stronger communities fund. Ninety-five per cent of the $252 million fund went to Coalition-held or marginal electorates. The Government has continually shown it will use public money for its own political gain.

Now let me turn to exhibit 2, financial mismanagement. During his time as Treasurer, the Premier set up and oversaw icare, which ripped off 52,000 injured workers to the tune of $80 million but sent executives' salaries skyrocketing, even as recently as today. We now hear more than 100 icare executives are being handed massive pay rises, just months after the Government spent $1.9 billion bailing out a key compensation insurance fund managed by icare. Since 2015 icare has failed to publicly register 422 contracts worth more than $150,000 each. Millions of dollars in contracts were awarded without going to an open tender process—all on the watch of the former Treasurer, who is now, of course, the Premier. Does that sound like responsible fiscal management? I do not think so.

I now turn to another performance failure, exhibit three, jobs for mates. Former Deputy Premier John Barilaro was handed a plum overseas trade posting to New York, a position he created whilst a member of Government. One Cabinet Minister was stood down over the saga. Yet under this Liberal-Nationals Government, nepotism at taxpayer's expense is normal business practice. The upper House inquiry is still getting to the bottom of taxpayers' money being spent on high salaries and the expenses of executive trade roles.

In the interests of time, I conclude with exhibit four, outsourcing of manufacturing. The Government is obsessed with offshoring transport projects. New South Wales industry, manufacturers and businesses missed out on trains, ferries and light rail that could have been built right here. What was the financial outcome of this policy? It was budget blowouts of $4.8 billion and approximately 4,100 missed job opportunities in New South Wales. The Government has shown time and again when it comes to public resources it cannot be fully trusted. Those opposite might use the bill to talk big about transparency and accountability, but their actions tell a different story.

NSW Labor firmly believes in checks and balances when it comes to public resources. People work hard for their dollar, they work overtime, double time and two and three jobs. They just want their tax money spent where it is needed, not where it is politically convenient. That is why NSW Labor introduced the Fiscal Responsibility Amendment (Privatisation Restrictions) Bill 2021 and the Government Grants Administration Bill 2021. Both bills would have strengthened accountability and transparency in the distribution of public funding and dealing with public assets. Both bills lapsed in August 2022 because the Liberal-Nationals Government would not put them to a vote in the Parliament.

While NSW Labor does not oppose the bill, the Government should not get the pat on the back it thinks it deserves. The bill is a welcome step in the right direction. Let us not be fooled; this bill could have been passed five years ago. It was not and is only now brought forward with an election less than 150 days away. My colleagues in the upper House will continue to work constructively with Independent members to ensure that amendments are moved to provide a greater level of transparency, in particular, about the actual state of our financial affairs.

Mr JAMIE PARKER (Balmain) (20:46:42):

On behalf of The Greens, I address the Government Sector Audit and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. What an effort by the member for Lake Macquarie and the Government. The member for Lake Macquarie as the chair of the Public Accounts Committee [PAC] has an outstanding record. I see the member has arrived in the House. The Government has all of question time to pat itself on the back but it is important to acknowledge other members who do outstanding work.

Ms Felicity Wilson:

He pats himself on the back in question time too.

Mr JAMIE PARKER:

That is right. The reason why this bill is important is because we want to have confidence in our democracy. A lot of people think that there are two rules—one for them and one for us. If the Government gives someone a little bit too much money in their JobSeeker payment, it drags them over hot coals. But if a company at the big end of town gets $16 billion in COVID support—like Harvey Norman and his mates—don't worry, it can keep that money. When it comes to development, "Sorry, you can't have that dormer", but if you are Kerry Packer, "Mate, you want answers to the bid? No worries, we will give you that public waterfront land, no tender for your casino licence, and you can build a massive hotel there, that's fine."

People are concerned that there is one rule for politicians and one rule for everyone else; one rule for government, one rule for them. That is why this bill is so important. We want the public to have confidence in our democratic system of government and, more importantly, in the way we spend their money. We talk about how people work hard for their money. They definitely do, and they want to make sure that when the Government puts its hand in their pockets that the money it takes is spent effectively.

In New South Wales there are mega profits made by the mining sector and huge amounts of revenue generated by the mining sector but it is difficult to touch. Queensland has introduced new levies on fossil fuel extraction businesses. If New South Wales did that, we would gain $10 billion or $15 billion per annum. We are forgoing huge amounts of revenue because we are not making the decisions to take a piece of the pie when it comes to value uplift. In the Australian Capital Territory, if a council by the stroke of a pen increases the value of a property, the Territory takes 75 per cent of that uplift—that is the Territory, not the land banking developer—so that it can build schools, hospitals and community centres. In New South Wales we say, "No, land banker, you take all of that."

It is clear that we need a consistent, purposeful audit, and follow the dollar performance audits are a critical part of that. That is why I acknowledge the work of the member for Lake Macquarie. Follow the dollar has made a real change. It has been a big deal in my electorate, especially around WestConnex. The Auditor tried to look at WestConnex, but one of the challenges is that the system cannot be penetrated because there are subcontractors of subcontractors of subcontractors and so on. With the Government Sector Audit and Other Legislation Amendment Bill, the Auditor will have more power to follow where taxpayer's dollars go.

One of the critical issues we often talk about in the House is around value for money. Did the light rail cost too much? The audit process is a way that we can ensure governments are held accountable. That is why the work of the member for Lake Macquarie is important. Part of the reason the bill is before us today is that the Government, by virtue of numbers and the changing culture of this place, recognises the need for negotiation. In 2000, when I first came to Parliament, if I said to the Government, "We've got this great amendment", I would be told, "Mate, see you later. We've got the numbers. Thanks for coming." I believe that kind of government does not get good results. A government that negotiates and shows goodwill gets better results. This bill, with the proposed Government amendments, is an example of that.

It is a credit to the member for Lake Macquarie, who as chair of the PAC has taken a real interest. This is important to all of us. I acknowledge the effort the member has put into the bill. This is a high-quality bill because of his intervention and obviously the work of his staff. They are a bit tired, a bit worse for wear, not their usual bright, shiny faces, but they are here because we are trying to do the right thing for the people of New South Wales by having good government. I commend the bill to the House and again acknowledge the member for Lake Macquarie.

Mr GREG PIPER (Lake Macquarie) (20:51:42):

I speak in favour of the Government Sector Audit and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. I note that Government amendments have been circulated. I can confirm that the amendments, while not achieving every element of the recommendations of the O'Connor Marsden report—the quadrennial review that was published earlier this year—certainly go a long way towards delivering on the recommendations. I acknowledge the member for Balmain. I will not have too many more opportunities to serve with him in this place. I appreciate his very generous words. A lot of people have worked hard on this legislation and I acknowledge Jamie Parker, the member for Balmain, as one of those. I also give a big shout‑out to Tamara Smith. I hope she is feeling better soon.

I am proud to have been a member of the Public Accounts Committee for just on a decade now. I have been its chair since 2019, including for a period serving with the member for North Shore, who has carriage of the bill in the House in her role as Parliamentary Secretary. The Public Accounts Committee is an important committee and its remit is important to the State. It certainly broadened my understanding of the Audit Office and confirmed in my mind that it is an organisation critical to the good governance of New South Wales. The Public Accounts Committee is also critical to the people of New South Wales in providing information and understanding of the disbursement of their funds, which are generally well managed. As members know, from time to time there are issues that only the Auditor-General can bring to light and bring about the change needed to correct those issues. That said, the Auditor-General works within the constraints of the Audit Office budget and its workforce, and is often restricted in carrying out some of the work it may wish to do from time to time if it had the resources.

However, one area the Audit Office would like to examine is non-government entities where public funds are expended. In New South Wales the ability to follow the dollar has been a glaring omission, which is an anomaly in the New South Wales system compared to other Australian jurisdictions. Before I go further on that point, one of the most important things that the Public Accounts Committee can do is respect the requests of the Auditor-General and Audit Office in seeking the powers and facilities that they need to examine the activities of the Government and the use of taxpayer funds. Part of the Public Accounts Committee's remit is a statutory undertaking for a quadrennial review. That was done earlier this year by O'Connor Marsden, which made a number of recommendations, particularly around "follow the dollar" powers.

I acknowledge O'Connor Marsden, which was not on our radar as an audit company before we went through the process of looking for one. It was very hard to get a substantial auditor that had the resources to undertake the review. O'Connor Marsden was absolutely excellent. I was pleased we found O'Connor Marsden because it did the job extraordinarily well and did justice to the request of the Public Accounts Committee. It made a number of recommendations, and "follow the dollar" was one of the major ones. For a very long time, the Public Accounts Committee has been fighting to get those powers for the Auditor-General, and that is now being proposed by the Government in this bill and the proposed amendments. That is very pleasing.

I turn briefly to the detail of the bill. I note that the "follow the dollar" powers extend to local governments as well as the State under the bill. That is important to the proper accounting of public money. That said, it should be noted that the Auditor-General has had the power to audit councils since 2016, but the Local Government Act will be amended ensure that it contains the "follow the dollar" provisions. New section 38EA reflects that the Audit Office powers are designed to ensure that an entity is carrying out its activities effectively, economically, efficiently and in compliance with all related laws. The bill is not just about ensuring that public money is going where it is supposed to be going.

"Follow the dollar" pathways are also extended to other public services, including charities and not‑for‑profit organisations. Put simply, if public money is flowing into an organisation, the Audit Office will be empowered, within reason, to make sure that it is being properly managed and doing what it was intended to do. It will no longer matter if the organisation getting the public money is a government or non-government entity. The scrutiny will be there, as it should be. It is not an audit of the entity's entire operation; it is an audit of the entity's activities as they relate to the public money and then only when the Audit Office has reason to do so. I believe the "follow the dollar" powers will be used judiciously but appropriately, and their very existence should, I hope, improve other entities' actions around public funds they receive on the chance that that type of audit can occur. A little bit of tension is a good thing.

New South Wales is not forging a new path with the bill. The powers in the bill already exist in every other Australian State. I thank the Government for bringing this long-awaited reform forward. As I have outlined, there were some problems and I believe that they are fixed by the Government's proposed amendments. To its credit, the Government has stepped up to accept many, but not all, of the recommendations stemming from the quadrennial review. I remember first speaking to former Premier Berejiklian about "follow the dollar" powers some years ago. While I know she was inclined to pursue them, we never quite got them. The current Premier Dominic Perrottet was Treasurer at that time, and I am pleased that he is of the same mind as he was then. The bill is before the House because former Premier Berejiklian and Premier Perrottet believe that "follow the dollar" is a good tool for governance of public moneys.

I also acknowledge the work and support of Treasurer Matt Kean. It is notionally and numerically possible that a government in minority could have a bill like this forced upon them, but it so much better as the gift of the Government. I am certain that we could not have landed here without the support of Premier and Cabinet, including Michael Coutts-Trotter and Kate Boyd. I particularly thank Monica Tudehope from the Premier's office along with Dimitry Chugg-Palmer. Both of them have been somewhat traumatised by dealing with me lately. I acknowledge that Dimitry had to put up with me last week over the Port of Newcastle bill. I offer my sincere apologies to them. Another person I often neglect to recognise is Jason Gordon from my office. He has done so much heavy lifting in this space. He has become an expert on this, working alongside my Independent colleagues and their staff. I have been remiss in forgetting to recognise him a number of times. I thank Jason.

One of the myriad problems the Government has with legislation like this is that the Audit Office is such a substantial and important organisation which has always shown great integrity and fairness. We must go down this path with confidence in widening its scope, not just to fall in line with other Australian jurisdictions but to provide the people of New South Wales with the confidence that their money is being properly managed and well spent. I recognise the Auditor-General, Margaret Crawford, and her staff, who I believe do an amazing job for us. I have said numerous times that I believe they are the gold standard of such an entity. A lot of people have been involved in this bill, including Monica Tudehope. I thank her very much again. The bill should resolve many other matters. I might deal with a number of omissions to the bill next year, depending on what happens with the Government. If it is a minority government, I will come knocking. I thank everybody. I commend the bill to the House.

Ms FELICITY WILSON (North Shore) (21:01:48):

On behalf of Mr Matt Kean: In reply: I thank all members who contributed to debate on the Government Sector Audit and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. We heard from the member for Macquarie Fields, the member for Balmain and the member for Lake Macquarie. As the member for Balmain did, I acknowledge the member for Lake Macquarie's strident advocacy for accountability and transparency, not just in his role as chair of the Public Accounts Committee but in all of his thoughts, deeds and actions in this place. On behalf of the individuals he thanked in his contribution, as well as the Premier and the Treasurer, I thank the member for Lake Macquarie for his cooperation with the Government on the bill.

As members would be aware from the debate, the bill proposes amendments to the Government Sector Audit Act 1983 to implement the Government's response to the Public Accounts Committee report No. 10/57 from September this year entitled "Quadrennial review of the Audit Office of New South Wales 2022''. I foreshadow that at the end of the second reading debate the Government will move amendments to the bill. I note that valuable contributions have been made throughout the debate regarding the Auditor-General's access to confidential information. The substance of that issue will be dealt with by the proposed amendments. Therefore, I do not propose to deal with the matter in reply but will speak to it in the consideration in detail stage.

The bill before the House will (a) establish the Auditor-General as an independent officer of Parliament; (b) confer on the Auditor-General "follow the dollar" powers; (c) change provisions regarding the Auditor‑General's access to confidential documents; (d) make minor amendments to how a review of the Audit Office is conducted under section 48A of the audit Act; and (e) clarify that the Public Accounts Committee has the function of reviewing the annual and other reports of the Audit Office. I join with the member for Lake Macquarie in recognising and thanking the staff, who are in the Chamber, for their work putting the legislation together and working with the member for Lake Macquarie on some of the proposed amendments. I thank Monica Tudehope, Dimitry Chugg-Palmer and Jason Gordon. I recognise the Auditor-General, Margaret Crawford, and her team. I thank her for her contribution to the State of New South Wales. In conclusion, passage of the bill will enhance parliamentary transparency and accountability. I commend the bill to the House.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER:

The question is that this bill be now read a second time.

Motion agreed to.

Consideration in detail requested by Ms Felicity Wilson.

Consideration in Detail

The DEPUTY SPEAKER:

By leave: I shall propose the bill in one group of clauses and schedules. The question is that clauses 1 to 2 and schedules 1 to 4 be agreed to.

Ms FELICITY WILSON (North Shore) (21:05:06):

By leave: I move Government amendments Nos 1 to 3 on sheet c2022-213G in globo:

Confidential information

No. 1

Pages 11 and 12, Schedule 3[6], line 23 on page 11 to line 13 on page 12. Omit all words on the lines. Insert instead—

[6]Section 36(8)

Omit the subsection.

[6A] Section 36A

Insert after section 36—

36ADisclosure of confidential information

(1)An authorised person must not disclose confidential information unless the Auditor-General has authorised the disclosure.

(2)The Auditor-General may authorise the disclosure of confidential information only if—

(a)in the Auditor-General's opinion, the disclosure of the confidential information is—

(i)in the public interest, and

(ii)necessary for the exercise of the Auditor-General's functions, and

(b)the Auditor-General has, at least 28 days before authorising the disclosure of the confidential information, notified the Premier that the Auditor-General is proposing to disclose the information, and

(c)the Premier has not, within 28 days after being notified by the Auditor-General of the proposed disclosure, issued a certificate that the disclosure of the confidential information is, in the Premier's opinion, not in the public interest.

(3)The Auditor-General or Premier, in forming an opinion under subsection (2) about whether or not it is in the public interest to disclose confidential information, must consider the public interest factors both for and against the disclosure.

(4)A certificate of the Premier that it is not in the public interest to disclose confidential information is conclusive evidence of that fact.

(5)If information is confidential information, a claim of confidentiality or privilege is not waived merely because the information is accessed, provided or produced under this Act.

(6)In this section—

confidential information

means—

(a)Cabinet information within the meaning of the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009, or

(b)information that could be subject to a claim of privilege by the State or a public official in a court of law.

disclose

includes publish.

Review of the Audit Office

No. 2

Page 12, Schedule 3[7], lines 14–18. Omit all words on the lines.

Confidential information

No. 3

Pages 13 and 14, Schedule 4[6], line 18 on page 13 to line 7 on page 14. Omit all words on the lines. Insert instead—

[6]Section 423(5)

Omit the subsection.

[7]Section 423A

Insert after section 423—

423ADisclosure of confidential information

(1)An authorised person must not disclose confidential information unless the Auditor-General has authorised the disclosure.

(2)The Auditor-General may authorise the disclosure of confidential information only if—

(a)in the Auditor-General's opinion, the disclosure of the confidential information is—

(i)in the public interest, and

(ii)necessary for the exercise of the Auditor-General's functions, and

(b)the Auditor-General has, at least 28 days before authorising the disclosure of the confidential information, notified the Premier that the Auditor-General is proposing to disclose the information, and

(c)the Premier has not, within 28 days after being notified by the Auditor-General of the proposed disclosure, issued a certificate that the disclosure of the confidential information is, in the Premier's opinion, not in the public interest.

(3)The Auditor-General or Premier, in forming an opinion under subsection (2) about whether or not it is in the public interest to disclose confidential information, must consider the public interest factors both for and against the disclosure.

(4)A certificate of the Premier that it is not in the public interest to disclose confidential information is conclusive evidence of that fact.

(5)If information is confidential information, a claim of confidentiality or privilege is not waived merely because the information is accessed, provided or produced under this Act.

(6)In this section—

authorised person

has the same meaning as in section 423.

confidential information

means—

Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009

(a)Cabinet information within the meaning of the , or

(b)information that could be subject to a claim of privilege by the State or a public official in a court of law.

disclose

includes publish.

Amendment No. 2 omits schedule 3 [7] regarding the reviewer providing an opportunity for auditable entities to make submissions about the auditing practices and standards of the Auditor-General. Concerns have been raised with the Government about the effect of the amendment. The Government considered that providing the reviewer with the views of the entities subject to the functions of the audit office would be a valuable additional input into future quadrennial review processes. Indeed, such a process was even undertaken absent this legislative provision as part of the most recent quadrennial review. However, in light of the concerns raised, the Government is comfortable withdrawing the proposal, which is what amendment No. 2 does.

Amendments Nos 1 and 3 omit schedule 3 [6] and schedule 4 [6] to the bill. In place of those items, new items will be inserted to implement a different model regarding the Auditor-General's capacity to access confidential information. As outlined in the second reading debate, the Auditor-General does not currently have a right under the Government Sector Audit Act 1983 to access Cabinet information or material that is legal professional privilege. The Auditor-General's power to access information under the current provisions of the Act explicitly carves out those two types of confidential information. The bill introduced by the Government would have reversed this position and allowed access to that confidential information. The Government has continued to consult regarding the proposed model of access to those documents in the bill.

In response to that consultation, the Government proposes an alternative approach. Amendments Nos 1 and 3 relate to the provisions of the Government Sector Audit Act 1983 and the Local Government Act 1993 respectively. Each set of amendments proposed to insert a new provision in the relevant Act to govern the disclosure and publication of confidential information. The amendments would permit the Auditor-General to publish or disclose Cabinet information or legally professional privileged information where the publication or disclosure of the information is, in the opinion of the Auditor-General, in the public interest; the Auditor-General has notified the Premier 28 days before the disclosure or publication of the proposed disclosure or publication of the information; and the Premier has not issued a certificate that, in the Premier's opinion, the disclosure of the relevant information is not in the public interest. A certificate issued by the Premier that information is not in the public interest will be conclusive and determinative of that question. The use of a public interest criterion in the bill is consistent with similar provisions found in many other jurisdictions. The issuing of a certificate will also operate similarly to the functions of the Commonwealth Auditor-General. However, the function is limited only to confidential information, and is therefore meaningfully narrower.

The Government has constructively engaged with the input provided in the bill as introduced and sought to deal with the concerns raised. The Government thanks the Auditor-General and the staff of the Audit Office for their engagement with the provisions of the bill, ensuring that it will work as intended. As outlined in the second reading speech, it is important that the Auditor-General has the capacity to scrutinise and hold Executive Government to account. It is equally important that the legitimate public interest in the foundational constitutional principles and the confidentiality of certain government documents is respected. The Government thinks that the amendment strikes an appropriate balance between those two critical issues. I encourage members to support the amendments.

Mr GREG PIPER (Lake Macquarie) (21:09:36):

I acknowledge the staff from the Premier's office and from the Treasurer's office. It has not been an easy point that we have arrived at. There has been quite a bit of toing and froing over the weightings of the different interests between the Audit Office and the Premier, particularly relating to issues around documents that might be considered Cabinet-in-confidence. The question of how public interest tests are determined and who that decision is left to if access to Cabinet-in-confidence documents is codified is very interesting.

I note for the record that the documents that have been requested in the past by the Audit Office have, if not always, generally invariably been provided without any problem between the Audit Office or the Premier's office. It is not something that the Opposition would necessarily expect to cause a significant problem. However, once access is codified then there are certainly opportunities for this to cause the Government some concern. I recognise the comments in this respect by the member for North Shore. At any point in time the Premier or the Cabinet might put a different weighting on the sensitivity of certain matters compared with what the Auditor‑General might think should be released. This codification provides the mechanism to get right the balance that the member for North Shore referred to. Is the bill perfect? No. It is rare for a piece of legislation, unless it is drafted by the crossbench, to be perfect. For the record that was a joke. It is very rare to introduce legislation that satisfies everybody's needs, particularly when there are competing interests. I think that we have arrived at a fairly healthy point.

I will deal with amendments Nos 1 and 3 together because they are effectively the same measures around confidential information. One relates to State government and one relates to local government. I agree that the amendments have probably been landed as well as possible. I appreciate the lines that amendment No. 2 will omit regarding reviewing the Audit Office. Item [7] of the bill would allow for an Airbnb-style review, where if someone has just been audited by the Office of the Auditor-General they could be asked to do a little survey. Perhaps they might leave the Audit Office a five-star rating. Seeing as this is being proposed for the Audit Office, perhaps it could also be done for other entities, such as the Ombudsman or the ICAC, which would be nice.

Someone who goes through the ICAC process could be asked to fill out a survey—"How did that go for you? How did you enjoy your experience with the ICAC?" I suspect that neither the ICAC nor the Audit Office would be interested in that. If there is a problem with a professional organisation that is charged with doing a job then it can be dealt with in some other way. I am pleased with the omission in amendment No. 2, and I thank the members who agreed to move that amendment. The amendments were contested and hard fought, and they have landed as well as they possibly could have. I thank the members who have been involved.

Mr ANOULACK CHANTHIVONG (Macquarie Fields) (21:14:19):

On behalf of the Opposition, I make brief comments about the amendments. Certainly, the constructive way in which the Independents and all members of Parliament have reached this conclusion on the bill is welcome, particularly on the disclosure of confidential information. Information can be confidential, but it should be seen in light of the public interest test, which is specifically made clear in new section (2) (a) (i) and (ii), so that if the Auditor‑General is going to be an independent officer of the Parliament, they need to be able to exercise those powers and make those decisions. In the meantime, the government of the day has the opportunity to debate that if it so wishes. I welcome the bill and thank our Independent colleagues and all members who have worked hard to reach a good place.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER:

The question is that the Government amendments Nos 1 to 3 on sheet c2022‑213G be agreed to.

Amendments agreed to.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER:

The question is that clauses 1 and 2, and schedules 1 to 4 as amended be agreed to.

Clauses 1 and 2, and schedules 1 to 4 as amended agreed to.

Third Reading

Ms FELICITY WILSON:

On behalf of Mr Matt Kean: I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Motion agreed to.