Making local decision making accountable

Executive summary

A proposed brief on clear government responses, community authority and reporting that follows decisions through to delivery.

Local Decision Making should be judged by whether community priorities influence real programs, services and decisions.

Context and evidence

This draft is based on IRAAC’s May discussion report. It does not assert that an agency has accepted a priority or entered an agreement. Formal policy references and any negotiated commitments should be checked with the relevant agency before this edition is submitted.

Proposed response

The proposed request is for agencies to identify the appropriate decision-maker for each priority and agree how a response will return to community. A useful response states what can be done, what cannot yet be agreed and when the matter will be revisited. Local organisations should help define the reporting approach.

Purpose and intended audience

This government edition is prepared for relevant nsw agency policy and program teams — recipients to be confirmed. Explain the issue, propose a discussion and identify the evidence required before a formal submission. It should be read alongside the other audience editions, which consider the same issue from different responsibilities. The proposed destination does not establish that anyone received, endorsed or approved this report.

What a useful next update would show

The next edition should identify which proposed actions were accepted, what was actually completed and what still needs attention. Supporting records should be checked before any result is reported. If evidence remains limited, the report should say so rather than infer progress from activity alone.

Before submission, confirm the agency remit, recipient, supporting evidence and authorised sign-off. No agency endorsement, funding decision or delivery commitment is recorded here. A later report should quote the verified response accurately and explain what remains unresolved.