Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 16-19 of 19
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Public Accounts committee  If I could just add to that, clearly from my perspective this peer review goes to the core of the OAG's business. It's the heart; it's about audit quality and audit performance. It's absolutely focused on what matters to the reputation of the OAG understanding that the chair referred to earlier.

September 21st, 2010Committee meeting

Ian McPhee

Public Accounts committee  I think it's a matter for the Auditor General at the end of the day. Certainly in Australia we judiciously use footnotes to refer to key sources of evidence, particularly government documents or matters of that kind, and sometimes we use footnotes just to provide a little bit more background information, rather than cluttering up the main report itself.

September 21st, 2010Committee meeting

Ian McPhee

Public Accounts committee  I can respond to part of that question. I'll ask Deb Jackson to assist as well. I think it is a matter of discretion. When we did the review we provided not only the recommendations that addressed what we considered to be the significant matters that the OAG needed to take into account, but we also made suggestions, which are discretionary, in areas where we believe the OAG should consider approaches that may improve the presentation and communication effectiveness of the reports.

September 21st, 2010Committee meeting

Ian McPhee

Public Accounts committee  Thank you, Chair. Good evening. I am very pleased to appear today to discuss the international peer review of the Office of the Auditor General of Canada that was completed in May of this year. The review, as you have mentioned, was a joint effort, with significant contributions from each of the respective audit offices of the Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark.

September 21st, 2010Committee meeting

Ian McPhee