Fraud Control--A State Perspective (From Fraud Prevention and Control, P 1-7, 2000, Australian Institute of Criminology -- See NCJ-186569)

• NCJ Number: 186571
• Author(s): Brendan Butler
• Date Published: January 2001
• Length: 7 pages
• Sale Source: Australian Institute of Criminology
• Publication Format: Document
• Publication Type: Issue Overview
• Language: English
• Country: Australia
• Note: Paper presented at the Fraud Prevention and Control Conference convened by the Australian Institute of Criminology on August 24-25, 2000.

Annotation

This paper provides an overview of the legal and institutional framework developed in Queensland (Australia) to counter fraud and other forms of serious misconduct by State public-sector employees, and it also examines the effectiveness of current State fraud control measures in place, suggesting how they can be strengthened.

Abstract

For the purposes of this paper, "fraud" is defined as "dishonestly obtaining a benefit by deception or other means." Queensland's system of fraud control for the public sector has involved the following: organizational systems and processes that restrict the opportunities for public-sector employees to commit fraud and other corrupt acts without being detected; investigative bodies with adequate resources, expertise, and powers to conduct effective investigations of suspected instances of corruption; and processes that reinforce the value of public-sector employees acting ethically. An important early development in countering fraud in Queensland was the enactment of the Financial Administration and Audit Act of 1977, which was a Queensland public-sector "watershed." This act has been associated with the growth of internal audit, operational audit, and performance evaluation units within public-sector agencies. The primary mechanism Queensland has used to encourage a more ethical climate in the public sector is the Public Sector Ethics Act of 1994. This act specifies ethics principles as the basis of good public administration in Queensland and defines the framework for all State public-sector agencies to develop a code of conduct. The author recommends that all public-sector agencies be required to have in place a comprehensive anti-corruption strategy. This strategy should include regular agency-wide corruption risk assessments; the allocation of responsibility within the organization for managing the strategy; internal and external reporting procedures that make it easier for staff and others to report suspected misconduct; a comprehensive staff awareness program; and dissemination of information to client and the community that sets out the agency's principles and procedures for dealing with improper staff behavior.