Oversight

The authority head is ultimately accountable for integrity in an authority. A key responsibility is to ask the right questions at the right time to seek assurance – a level of confidence or certainty – that integrity is being appropriately practiced, managed and accounted for. This is informed in part by the process established to analyse and review the framework.

Well-designed internal governance settings and processes, including the integrity framework itself, facilitates the authority head receiving accurate and timely information from across the authority. This information can be enhanced by framework custodians and other assurance providers taking into account the work of external bodies. The authority might have been involved in a specific review by an external body which might also inform the authority head.

What oversight looks like in an authority and the level of assurance it brings are decisions for the authority head and senior leadership team.

Why is oversight important?

To be effective, oversight must occur at multiple levels across the authority. Leaders effectively supervising and reconciling business processes, a well-developed audit process, and the authority head reinforcing integrity expectations all contribute to oversight. Oversight is essential to assure stakeholders, like Parliament and the community, that public resources are being protected. Oversight by external bodies assists with this assurance.

In practice, oversight seeks to reduce the opportunity for misconduct and corruption to occur by making sure:

• legislation, regulations, policies and standards are met and followed
• integrity risks are identified, controlled and monitored
• due diligence occurs before key decisions are made
• systems and processes are working well and being continuously improved.

Ideas for good and better practice for oversight

Good practice

• Use every opportunity to get assurance that integrity is being appropriately practiced, managed and accounted for. Authority heads can:
  • prioritise integrity by publicly endorsing and supporting it
  • provide adequate resources to coordinate and maintain the framework and the actions and initiatives in it
  • balance responses to integrity breaches and actions and initiatives to promote integrity and prevent misconduct
  • design governance settings and processes to inform themselves through regular reports from across the authority
  • establish specialist groups or subcommittees with specific responsibilities for providing assurance on key risks, for example subcommittees of the audit committee or an integrity coordination group
  • take findings of the self-analysis and review process seriously, implementing changes as necessary and reprioritising resources if required
  • implement measures and other metrics that can be pointed to in support of the current approach to integrity.

Better practice

• Adapt or develop new arrangements to oversee outsourced programs and services. Public-private partnerships and other contractual arrangements that transfer responsibility outside the authority require strong accountability and oversight to give assurance that work is being completed with integrity.