Pharmacy Daily | Western Aust’s $580m RAT problem

AN EYE-WATERING $580m has been spent on RATs by the West Australian government, according to the state's Auditor General, Caroline Spencer, who was flabbergasted and reported, she has "never before witnessed such escalation in the cost of a program over such a short timeframe".

Spencer released the Auditor General's report, Financial Audit Results - State Government 2021-22 - Part 2: COVID-19 Impacts, which was tabled in Parliament yesterday.

The report shares findings and observations from the 2022 State audit cycle.

It is intended to provide a level of transparency and a public record of some of the irregular decisions, transactions and impacts that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic response and reflects on some of the lessons that may be learned from the period.

Spencer continued her remarks on the unusually large expenditure "occurring with a lack of due consideration of the impacts, or without a record of anyone pausing to ask what level of procurement was sufficient and whether this had been achieved".

She noted the State's expenditure of $580m on RATs has received significant attention both in Parliament and the wider community, and is an area of focus in this report.

"An initial intention by Health entities to spend $3m on RATs for health workers and returning travellers rapidly evolved to purchasing $440m worth of RATs - around twice the cost of the Bunbury Hospital redevelopment.

"Along with the $140m spent by the Department of Finance on RATs, public entities spent the equivalent of 10% of the State's 2022 operating surplus on diagnostic plastics without demonstrable evidence of clear, considered and coordinated planning or ongoing advice as to the necessity of the expenditure," said Spencer as she also acknowledged the uncertainty that the pandemic created.

"Our audits found that to accommodate the RATs, Health Support Services increased their warehouses from two to 10 but struggled with the large increase in inventory, as the controls for receiving, recording and distribution were poor.

"There needs to be a point where we take a step back and assess if the ongoing decisions being made are sound, in the public interest and represent value for money.

"It is important that the right lessons are learned from this period," Spencer concluded.