Appendix A. Submissions and comments
Click the link below to download a PDF copy of Appendix A. Submissions and comments.
3. Cost-effectiveness
Conclusion
The agencies involved in the two advertising campaigns could not show that the campaigns were cost-effective. Systems for assessing cost-effectiveness were inadequate. Agencies did not always set clear campaign objectives and targets for assessing the campaigns’ performance. They did not evaluate systematically and objectively whether the campaigns met their objectives.
2. Legal compliance
Conclusion
In our opinion, the two advertising campaigns did not fully comply with the PAA. Some of the campaign advertisements included political advertising. One campaign did not comply with limits on television advertising.
The agencies involved in the campaigns interpret the laws differently. They maintain that they complied with their legal obligations.
At the very least, this suggests that the laws are not sufficiently clear.
1. Audit context
The Victorian Government uses advertising to communicate with the public about important issues, such as government services, changes to the law and health and safety. It spent at least $84.6 million on advertising in 2019–20.
In 2017, the Victorian Parliament introduced new laws to ensure government advertising is in the public interest, and to stop public sector agencies publishing political advertising.
Appendix C. Scope of this audit
| Who we audited | What the audit cost |
|---|---|
| DELWP, DET, DHHS (DFFH and DH), DJCS, DJPR, DoT, DPC, DTF and Cenitex | The cost of this audit was $800 000. |
What we assessed
This audit used the following lines of inquiry and criteria:
Appendix D. Departments’ BIAs, BCPs and exercising
BIAs prior to COVID-19
Figure D1 outlines our assessment of departments’ BIAs prior to COVID-19.
FIGURE D1: Our assessment of departments’ BIAs prior to COVID-19
Appendix B. Acronyms and abbreviations
| Acronyms | |
|---|---|
| BCM | business continuity management |
| BCP | business continuity plan |
| BIA | business impact analysis |
| DEDJTR | Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources |
| DELWP |
Appendix A. Submissions and comments
Click the link below to download a PDF copy of Appendix A. Submissions and comments.
3. Response to COVID-19
Conclusion
Departments responded quickly and flexibly to COVID-19 and continue to do so. Departments’ BCM processes, structures and strategies have helped them quickly set up teams, make decisions and communicate to staff.
However, departments were not sufficiently prepared for a complex disruption. This meant they had to invest resources into developing documents, streamlining processes, upgrading technology and transitioning to remote working during the early stages of the pandemic.
2. Preparedness for a disruption
Conclusion
The VPS was not adequately prepared for the COVID-19 pandemic.
The VPS had limited central oversight and leadership on business continuity. This meant that it was not able to harness lessons learnt across all departments, and departments did not have a clear understanding of whole of government business continuity priorities in a large-scale disruption.