The increasing involvement of the private sector has been accompanied by a general trend toward diminished central oversight and coordination. This is problematic as agencies recognise that, for instance, 'shared outcomes' indicate the need for broader corporate governance arrangements across agencies. Realistically, these will take some time to accomplish operationally to the satisfaction of all parties and induce stakeholder confidence that there is a realistic framework for shared accountability, except where there is a lead agency that assumes overall accountability for the result.
An example of the need for cross-agency governance arrangements was highlighted in the ANAO's recent audit of the management of the administration of the Federation Fund Programme.78 That audit found that no Commonwealth department had the responsibility for monitoring the collective performance of Federation Fund projects against the programme's objectives. Consequently, up to the time of the audit, very little performance information on the achievement of the programme's overall objectives had been collected or reported to the Parliament.79 The audit noted that, where more than one portfolio is responsible for delivering the Government's programme objectives, the concept of whole of government performance reporting through the identification of a 'lead agency' is an area of potential improvement in Commonwealth reporting and accountability.80
The trend toward 'networked' or cross agency approaches is one that is likely to continue as agencies take advantage of the opportunities offered by more responsive service delivery. Equally, in the context of PPPs, responsibility for the achievement of government outcomes is shared across public and private sector entities. Further, governments may choose to contract with separate contractors for various parts of the overall project, thereby imposing an 'interface risk' on themselves arising from construction complexities and possibilities of construction cost and time overruns. In that environment, governance issues need to be given greater prominence and consideration. It may for example, be appropriate for governance arrangements to be set out in Cabinet submissions and subsequently approved by the executive. These issues need to be addressed sooner rather than later if gaps in accountability are to be prevented, or, at least, minimised.