Another undesirable behaviour is the reported extent to which unit performance received little time or attention so long as the unit was not reporting a loss. Achievement of public purposes was not a matter of ongoing concern. About one third of all units and three quarters of common service units show this side effect to some extent. Both categories of this side effect emphasize the need for financial reporting to be accompanied by appropriate reporting and oversight of performance, defined more broadly, to mitigate the risk that important aspects of performance cease to count because no one measures them. Excessive cost reflected in prices Revolving funds for both mandatory and optional common services have experienced problems in bringing their administrative and billing costs into reasonable line, as reported in previous studies and OAG reports.
Excessive costs factor into the prices that users pay.
Discontent with the level of fees charged contributed, at least partly, to the government's decision to stop using revolving funds for common services unless users also had the option of getting the same or similar services from the private sector. Some concern has been raised about the government changing user fees for an increasing number of services without having taken sufficient action to make the service more efficient. There may be some grounds for this concern, based on the available data. Financial statements do not generally show the levels of support and overhead costs in units with revolving funds, but there are indicators that they may be increasing. By contrast, at least one unit that recently received a revolving fund authority carried out extensive benchmarking to establish the potential for better and more efficient operations.