ABSTRACT
This chapter draws on examples from the United States, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Canada. It highlights the discretion available to auditors, which places them in a privileged position compared to most evaluators, and suggests that on its own the power to select topics is not enough to guarantee influence. The discretion allowed to auditors to make judgments about their study programs includes decisions about who is to make the choices, who should be consulted and what notice will be taken in response to their suggestions. The ability of state audit institutions (SAIs) to select their program—as a key element of their independence—is significant for a number of reasons. Statutory mandates provide SAIs with the right to undertake audits and report their findings. The legislation often provides a clear steer as to the subject matter to be chosen or the areas in which auditors can and cannot operate.
