Autonomy and control in three Australian Capital Territory-based integrity agencies

This article discusses the cases of three integrity agencies in one Australian jurisdiction and the means by which control is exercised and autonomy guaranteed. Integrity agencies include audit and ombudsman offices that have checking and vetting responsibilities over other parts of the administrative system. From the cases studied, it was evident that legislative arrangements were formally designed to provide considerable protections for the operational autonomy of all three integrity agencies, but that government control was primarily exercised through the appropriation of agency funds via parliamentary mechanisms. The cases also revealed that control can be, perhaps, more political and unpredictable when the government of the day dominates the parliament and its role in budget appropriation. What also emerged was the importance of other controls such as professional codes of conduct and the significance of securing ‘real’ autonomy with the development of the reputation, esteem and professional linkages by the integrity agencies themselves.