Introduction

1.1 Parliamentary committee and Auditor-General reports identify risks to the successful delivery of government outcomes and provide recommendations to address them.

• Parliamentary committees consist of members from one or both Houses of the Parliament. Parliamentary committee inquiries are used to ‘investigate specific matters of policy or government administration or performance’.⁵ Where a parliamentary committee has made policy recommendations, the responsible minister is required to prepare and table a government response in the Parliament.⁶
• The Auditor-General provides independent assurance as to whether the Executive government is operating and accounting for its performance in accordance with the Parliament’s intent. Auditor-General reports, which include audited entities’ responses to recommendations, are tabled in the Parliament.⁷

1.2 The tabling in the Parliament of an agreed response to a parliamentary committee or Auditor-General recommendation is a formal commitment by the government or an entity to implement the recommended action.

1.3 This is the seventh performance audit since 2019 that has examined the effectiveness of Australian Government entities’ implementation of agreed parliamentary committee and Auditor-General recommendations. Details of the previous audits can be found in Appendix 3 of this report. The ANAO has also published insights from these audits, for the benefit of all Australian Government entities.⁸

Parliamentary committee recommendations

1.4 The Australian Public Service (APS) operates largely under principles-based frameworks, including that established by the Public Service Act 1999 (PS Act).⁹ The PS Act requires ‘an apolitical public service that is efficient and effective in serving the Government, the Parliament and the Australian public’.¹⁰ Members of the APS are subject to integrity obligations specified in the PS Act, including the APS Values.¹¹ The explanatory memorandum for the Public Service Bill 1999 stated that the APS Values ‘reflect public expectations of the relationship between public servants and the Government, the Parliament and the Australian community’.¹²

1.5 The Parliament has established expectations for the provision of government responses to parliamentary committee reports. The Senate has resolved that government responses to Senate and joint committee reports are required to be tabled in the Parliament within three months of the report being presented to the Senate.¹³ The House of Representatives (House) has resolved that government responses to House and joint committee reports are required to be tabled in the Parliament within six months of the report being presented to the House.¹⁴

1.6 Australian Government entities are responsible for preparing responses to parliamentary committee reports for government to consider. Provision of advice to support government in meeting its responsibilities to the Parliament is an important element of public-sector integrity and should be consistent with the expectations established by the Parliament, including through the PS Act.¹⁵

1.7 In previous audits of implementation of recommendations, the Auditor-General has reported on instances where entities have not effectively demonstrated implementation of all agreed recommendations examined by the ANAO (see Appendix 3). In response to these findings, the Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet wrote to departmental secretaries in August 2019, stating that:

The presentation of documents to the Parliament is an important component of the Government’s accountability to the Parliament and the broader community. It is critical for responsible agencies to monitor and implement the parliamentary committee’s recommendations agreed to by the Government. Accordingly, I strongly encourage departments and agencies to finalise Government responses to parliamentary committee reports in a timely manner so that the Government can table its response to a committee report within the timeframes established through the respective resolutions of the House of Representatives and the Senate … In addition to providing timely responses to Committee reports, it is important that departments and agencies have processes in place to monitor the implementation of the recommendations accepted by the Government. This includes Secretaries providing regular updates to their Minister(s) on implementation progress.¹⁶

1.8 The President of the Senate (President) and the Speaker of the House (Speaker) present reports biannually to the Senate and House, respectively, on the status of government responses to parliamentary committee reports.¹⁷ For each reporting period, the President’s and Speaker’s status reports include: all parliamentary committee reports with an outstanding response, including those carried over from previous reporting periods, unless the relevant parliamentary committee agrees a response is no longer required; and all parliamentary committee reports that received a response in the current reporting period.

1.9 Status reports in 2022–23 and 2023–24 show the number of responses to parliamentary committee reports that were received in the required timeframes (Table 1.1 and Table 1.2). For the four reporting periods to June/July 2024:

• of the 231 parliamentary committee reports in the President’s status report that had received a full response in the preceding six-month period, 15 (six per cent) were on time; and
• of the 96 parliamentary committee reports in the Speaker’s status report that had received a full response in the preceding six-month period, 22 (23 per cent) were on time.

Table 1.1: Senate — status of government responses to parliamentary committee reports^a

Note a: The ANAO identified discrepancies and could not obtain assurance over the completeness and accuracy of this data.

Note b: Partial responses occur where responses have been received for some but not all recommendations.

Note c: Includes responses denoted ‘Final*’ in the President’s report. This indicates the final response was provided during debate on a bill.

Note d: Includes ‘standard responses’ to 122 reports that noted all recommendations (see paragraph 1.11).

Source: ANAO analysis of the President’s Report to the Senate on the Status of Government Responses to Parliamentary Committee Reports.

Table 1.2: House of Representatives — status of government responses to parliamentary committee reports^a

Note a: The ANAO identified discrepancies and could not obtain assurance over the completeness and accuracy of this data.

Note b: In June 2023 the Liaison Committee of Chairs and Deputy Chairs agreed to recommend that House and joint committee reports presented prior to the commencement of the 46th Parliament (2 July 2019) be removed from the Speaker’s status report, unless the relevant committee resolved to retain those reports. Between the reporting periods ending in June 2023 and November 2023, 23 reports from the 45th Parliament were removed.

Note c: Partial responses occur where responses have been received for some but not all recommendations.

Note d: Includes ‘standard responses’ to 24 reports that noted all recommendations (see paragraph 1.11).

Source: ANAO analysis of the Speaker’s Schedule of the Status of Government Responses to Committee Reports.

1.10 In previous audits of implementation of recommendations, the Auditor-General has reported that compliance with the required timeframes was low for the parliamentary committee recommendations examined by the ANAO.¹⁸

1.11 In March 2024, the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister (the assistant minister) wrote to all ministers stating that there were more than 340 parliamentary committee reports from previous Parliaments with outstanding responses, and that to address the backlog, the assistant minister proposed that, where a committee’s report predated the current Parliament, the default position would be to issue a ‘standard response’ (unless the minister considered that a different response was required). The ‘standard response’ would note each recommendation and state that ‘given the passage of time, a substantive Government response is no longer appropriate’. Between 1 April 2024 and 31 August 2024, 223 government responses were tabled in the Parliament. Of these, 188 (84 per cent) made the ‘standard response’.¹⁹ Of reports that received the ‘standard response’, 95 (51 per cent) were to parliamentary committee reports tabled in the 46th Parliament (that is, between 2 July 2019 and 11 April 2022). ‘Standard responses’ were made to a combined total of 2,464 parliamentary committee recommendations.

1.12 The President’s and Speaker’s status reports list a large number of parliamentary committee reports with outstanding responses. For the three reporting periods to November/December 2023, nearly twice as many reports were tabled as received responses. In the reporting period ending June/July 2024, due to the large number of ‘standard responses’ tabled following the assistant minister’s correspondence, the number of reports with outstanding responses decreased. Excluding these ‘standard responses’, 28 more parliamentary committee reports were added to the President’s status report than received a response, and one more parliamentary committee report was added to the Speaker’s status report than received a response. As at June/July 2024, 270 and 69 parliamentary committee reports with outstanding responses are listed in the President’s and Speaker’s status reports, respectively.

Auditor-General recommendations

1.13 The ANAO undertakes an annual survey of entities that had been subject to a performance audit on their progress in implementing Auditor-General recommendations within 24 months of the recommendation being made. Table 1.3 shows implementation status based on entity self-reporting for recommendations made in 2017–18 to 2021–22.

Table 1.3: Entity self-reporting of Auditor-General performance audit recommendations implemented within 24 months

Note a: The percentages for 2019–20 do not total to 100 per cent due to rounding.

Source: ANAO, Annual Report 2023–24, available from https://www.anao.gov.au/work/annual-report/anao-annual-report-2023-24 [accessed 29 August 2024].

1.14 Previous audits of implementation of recommendations have examined 72 performance audit recommendations which entities have reported as implemented. Of these recommendations, the Auditor-General found that 42 (58 per cent) were fully implemented, 11 (15 per cent) were largely implemented, 14 (19 per cent) were partly implemented, and five (seven per cent) were not implemented.²⁰

Indigenous affairs portfolio

1.15 Responsibility for Indigenous affairs is within the Prime Minister and Cabinet portfolio.²¹ This responsibility comprises:

• ‘Australian Government Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander policy, programs, and service delivery’; and
• ‘improving results for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people through enhanced Indigenous economic rights to support economic independence, the provision of improved access to education, employment, health, wellbeing and other services, as well as the maintenance of cultural identity’.²²

1.16 For the purposes of this audit, the Indigenous affairs portfolio is taken to comprise the 13 non-corporate and corporate Commonwealth entities and companies within the Prime Minister and Cabinet portfolio that relate primarily to Indigenous affairs.²³

1.17 This audit focuses on two entities in the Indigenous affairs portfolio.

• Indigenous Business Australia (IBA) — IBA is a corporate Commonwealth entity established under the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Act 2005. IBA’s purpose is to ‘assist and enhance Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander self-management and economic self-sufficiency’; and ‘advance the commercial and economic interests of Aboriginal persons and Torres Strait Islanders by accumulating and using a substantial capital asset for the benefit of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’.²⁴ The IBA Board is the accountable authority for the entity under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act).
• National Indigenous Australians Agency (NIAA) — NIAA is an executive agency and non-corporate Commonwealth entity established on 1 July 2019. NIAA’s functions include leading and coordinating the Australian Government’s policy development, program design and implementation and service delivery for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; and coordinating Indigenous portfolio agencies and advancing a whole-of-government approach to improving the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.²⁵ The NIAA Chief Executive Officer is the entity’s accountable authority under the PGPA Act.

1.18 Table 1.4 shows IBA and NIAA’s budget and staffing levels for 2024–25.

Table 1.4: Budget and staffing levels, 2024–25

Note a: Average staffing level is a method of counting that adjusts for casual and part-time staff to show the average number of full-time equivalent employees.

Note b: Comprises opening balance/cash reserves, total funds from government and total funds from other sources.

Note c: Comprises departmental and administered resourcing.

Source: Australian Government, Portfolio Budget Statements 2024–25 Budget Related Paper No. 1.13: Prime Minister and Cabinet Portfolio, 2024, pp. 142, 189.

Rationale for undertaking the audit

1.19 Parliamentary committee and Auditor-General reports have identified risks to and shortcomings in the successful delivery of outcomes in the Indigenous affairs portfolio. Recommendations have specified actions aimed at addressing those risks and identified opportunities for improving public administration. Implementation of agreed recommendations delivers on a formal commitment to the Parliament and is an important part of realising the full benefit of a parliamentary inquiry or audit. Appropriate and timely implementation of agreed recommendations demonstrates accountability to the Parliament and a commitment to improving public administration.

1.20 This audit provides assurance to the Parliament about whether recommendations directed to IBA and NIAA are being implemented as agreed.

Audit approach

Audit objective, criteria and scope

1.21 The audit objective was to examine whether the selected entities have implemented a selection of agreed parliamentary committee and Auditor-General recommendations.

1.22 To form a conclusion against the objective, the following high-level criteria were adopted.

• Do IBA and NIAA have fit-for-purpose arrangements to respond to, monitor and implement agreed recommendations?
• Did IBA and NIAA respond to and implement agreed recommendations effectively?

1.23 For the purposes of this audit, an ‘agreed’ recommendation means:

• agreed in full or in part; or
• agreed in principle, with a commitment to undertake a specific action.

1.24 To allow sufficient time for implementation, the agreed recommendations examined in this audit were limited to recommendations contained in:

• parliamentary committee reports tabled between January 2020 and December 2022, where a government response was received prior to 31 December 2022; and
• Auditor-General reports tabled between January 2020 and December 2022.

1.25 The scope of this audit did not include:

• parliamentary committee reports where the subject of the report was either a review of annual reports, or an inquiry or review into proposed bills or delegated legislation; and
• recommendations that substantially overlapped with another recommendation in the scope of this audit or were examined in another ANAO performance audit.

1.26 For details of the methodology used to select recommendations for inclusion in the audit scope, see Appendix 4.

1.27 This audit is the first of two in 2024–25 examining implementation of recommendations in the Indigenous affairs portfolio. This audit focuses on IBA and NIAA’s arrangements for managing and implementation of a selection of 25 agreed recommendations, comprising 10 parliamentary committee recommendations and 15 Auditor-General recommendations. For details of the recommendations examined in this audit, see Appendix 5. Entities’ implementation of six Auditor-General recommendations from Auditor-General Report No. 25 2019–20 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Participation Targets in Major Procurements is the focus of the second audit.²⁶

Audit methodology

1.28 The audit involved:

• reviewing entity documentation; and
• meeting with relevant entity staff.

1.29 The audit was conducted in accordance with ANAO Auditing Standards at a cost to the ANAO of approximately $450,000.

1.30 The team members for the audit were Ashley Stephens, Rebecca Storen, Lily Engelbrethsen, Benjamin Foreman, Jillian Hutchinson, Eliza Glascott, Bezza Wolba, Jennifer Eddie and Christine Chalmers.

2.1 The tabling in Parliament of an agreed response to a parliamentary committee or Auditor-General recommendation is a formal commitment by the government or an entity to implement the recommended action.

2.2 Key observations from previous ANAO audits include the importance of governance arrangements to respond to, monitor and implement agreed parliamentary committee and Auditor-General recommendations. These arrangements include:

• establishing practices for identifying, responding to, implementing and closing recommendations;
• clearly assigning responsibility for the progression of individual recommendations;
• having systems in place to monitor and track the implementation of recommendations; and
• monitoring, oversight and assurance of implementation.²⁷

2.3 Entities that do not have fit-for-purpose governance arrangements for the implementation of recommendations increase the risk of inconsistency in administration and decision-making and are less likely to implement recommendations in accordance with commitments made to the Parliament.

Are arrangements to manage parliamentary committee recommendations fit for purpose?

2.4 Following NIAA’s establishment in July 2019, a number of NIAA’s corporate services were provided by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C) through a Memorandum of Understanding established in December 2019. Functions administered for NIAA under the arrangement included ministerial and parliamentary support, and governance, audit, risk and assurance activities.²⁸ NIAA administered these functions from November 2022.

2.5 Figure 2.1 illustrates IBA’s and NIAA’s practices to identify and respond to; implement; monitor and assure; and close agreed parliamentary committee recommendations as at August 2024. ‘Documented’ practices refer to practices that are clearly set out in documented procedures or guidance. ‘Established’ practices refer to actions that are consistently followed to achieve an outcome.

Figure 2.1: Practices to respond to, implement and monitor agreed parliamentary committee recommendations, as at August 2024

Note a: Refers to implementation planning activities.

Note b: ‘Monitoring’ refers to the administrative process of compiling updates on the implementation of recommendations and preparing reporting for oversight and assurance bodies.

Note c: IBA documented its practices in April 2024 during the course of the audit. As IBA did not have any active parliamentary committee recommendations as at August 2024, it had not established the documented practices.

Note d: NIAA documented its practices to implement, monitor and close agreed parliamentary committee recommendations in August 2024 during the course of the audit.

Source: ANAO analysis of IBA and NIAA documentation.

2.6 IBA did not have parliamentary committee recommendations within the scope of this audit and is not frequently subject to parliamentary committee recommendations.

Identifying parliamentary committee recommendations

2.7 Established processes to identify relevant parliamentary committee recommendations support the entity to be efficient and effective in serving the government, the Parliament and the Australian public (see paragraph 1.4).

2.8 Government responses to parliamentary committee reports are prepared by a portfolio ‘lead entity’, which consults with other entities as required. The PM&C tabling guidelines specify that the PM&C Tabling Office identifies and notifies an entity that it will be the lead entity for coordinating the government response to a particular parliamentary committee report.²⁹ It is the responsibility of the lead entity to consider whether input is required from other entities and to request input from those entities.

Indigenous Business Australia

2.9 IBA advised the ANAO in April 2024 that it had relied on other entities, particularly NIAA, to inform it of parliamentary recommendations relevant to IBA. In April 2024, IBA documented a process for identifying parliamentary recommendations that requires IBA’s Risk and Assurance section to monitor the Parliament’s website to identify recommendations relevant to IBA.

2.10 While NIAA is responsible for coordinating Indigenous portfolio agencies (see paragraph 1.17), NIAA does not have an established or documented practice for informing portfolio entities, such as IBA, of relevant recommendations.

National Indigenous Australians Agency

2.11 From 2020 to 2022, NIAA had some undocumented practices for identifying parliamentary recommendations. These practices were inconsistently implemented and did not capture all relevant parliamentary activity.

• 2020 — In April 2020, NIAA established a ‘Register of External Reviews’ for the purpose of capturing current and anticipated parliamentary committee reviews (and ANAO audits) relevant to NIAA, and identifying associated recommendations. The Register of External Reviews was provided to NIAA’s Audit and Risk Committee (ARC) at the June 2020 and September 2020 ARC meetings, and was not subsequently provided or maintained.The Register did not include all parliamentary committee reports relevant to NIAA.
• March 2021 to March 2022 — In this period the ARC had a standing agenda item for NIAA to report on Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit (JCPAA) recommendations related to or being implemented by NIAA. There were no relevant JCPAA recommendations in the period. The updates did not include recommendations from other parliamentary committees.
• 2022 — In June 2022, NIAA reported to the ARC that its established practice for identifying parliamentary committee recommendations was to rely on PM&C’s Tabling Office and Parliamentary and Ministerial Services section to notify the responsible business area, in line with PM&C’s tabling guidelines. In September 2022, NIAA’s Chief Operating Officer advised the ARC that NIAA’s Ministerial and Parliamentary section would be responsible for identifying and monitoring external reviews and parliamentary committee recommendations following the end of the shared service arrangement with PM&C (see paragraph 2.4) in November 2022. NIAA did not implement this practice.

2.12 In September 2023, NIAA documented its practices to identify relevant parliamentary recommendations. Where it is the lead entity, NIAA relies on PM&C’s Tabling Office to notify it, in line with PM&C’s tabling guidelines. Where it is not the lead entity, business areas rely on requests from lead entities to provide input to government responses and are required to notify NIAA’s Ministerial and Parliamentary section within the Office of the Chief Executive Officer of the request. The Ministerial and Parliamentary section is required to record the requests in a spreadsheet (see paragraph 2.22). NIAA advised the ANAO in June 2024 that the Ministerial and Parliamentary section does not monitor parliamentary activity, however individual line areas monitor inquiries relevant to their policy responsibilities.

Assisting government to respond to parliamentary committee recommendations

2.14 The government is responsible for responding to parliamentary committee recommendations, and entities are responsible for providing advice to government on possible responses (see paragraph 1.6).

Indigenous Business Australia

2.15 In April 2024, IBA documented responsibilities and practices for coordinating, drafting and clearing responses to ‘external audit’ recommendations which, in the context of IBA’s April 2024 Internal and External Audit Charter, refers to Auditor-General and JCPAA recommendations. IBA updated the charter in August 2024 to clarify that ‘external audit’ includes parliamentary committees other than the JCPAA. IBA’s documented guidance does not include information on the requirements for government responses to parliamentary committee reports or the process for providing proposed responses to government.

National Indigenous Australians Agency

2.17 In March 2022, NIAA reported to the ARC, in response to the ARC’s request for an update on arrangements for parliamentary committee recommendations, that business areas responded directly to ‘parliamentary enquiries’, and this communication was not coordinated centrally. This practice was undocumented.

2.18 In September 2023, NIAA documented practices for responding to parliamentary committee recommendations. After recommendations are identified (see paragraph 2.12), business areas are responsible for preparing the proposed government response for approval by the Chief Executive Officer and the minister and arranging for the approved government response to be tabled in Parliament or provided to the lead entity, where this is not NIAA. In August 2024, responsibility for arranging for responses to be approved and tabled was assigned to the Ministerial and Parliamentary section.

Timeliness of responses

2.19 As noted in paragraph 1.5, responses to parliamentary committee reports are required to be tabled within three or six months, depending on the type of committee. Entities are responsible for providing advice to government in sufficient time to meet these timeframes.³⁰

2.20 Between February 2019 and August 2024, five per cent of parliamentary committee reports and nine per cent of parliamentary committee recommendations related to Indigenous affairs were responded to within the timeframes set by the Parliament (see Table 2.1). This is lower than the Australian Government average for 2022–23 and 2023–24 of between six and 23 per cent (see paragraph 1.9, Table 1.1 and Table 1.2).

Table 2.1: Timeliness of responses to parliamentary committee reports and recommendations relevant to Indigenous affairs, February 2019 to August 2024

Note a: Includes parliamentary committee reports and recommendations that reference Indigenous affairs (based on a keyword search) or entities in the Indigenous affairs portfolio (see paragraph 1.16). Parliamentary committee reports where the subject of the report was a review of annual reports or estimates of government expenditure were excluded. Recommendations include those where an entity outside the Indigenous affairs portfolio is responsible for preparing the government response. There may be additional recommendations relevant to entities in the Indigenous affairs portfolio that were not captured.

Note b: Responses to House of Representatives committee recommendations are required within six months; responses to Senate and joint committee recommendations are required within three months (Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Tabling Guidelines, PM&C, Canberra, 2022, p. 11).

Source: ANAO analysis of parliamentary reporting.

2.21 NIAA advised the ANAO in June 2024 that it is the responsibility of the relevant business area to comply with required timeframes for preparing government responses to parliamentary committee reports.

2.22 From December 2022, NIAA monitored government responses to parliamentary committee reports in a spreadsheet. The spreadsheet lists reports for which NIAA is the lead entity for coordinating the government response or is required to provide input. As at June 2024, the spreadsheet listed 12 reports (three for which NIAA was the lead entity for some or all recommendations) and omitted some reports relevant to NIAA. For example, in April 2024, NIAA provided advice to the minister on 10 parliamentary committee reports with outstanding government responses (see paragraph 3.21). None of the 10 reports were included in the spreadsheet. The spreadsheet includes dates that requests were received and responses are due, and does not clearly indicate whether and when responses were completed, which would allow for monitoring of compliance with required timeframes.

2.23 In August 2024, NIAA documented a requirement for the Ministerial and Parliamentary section to maintain a register of relevant recommendations from parliamentary committee reports, responsible business areas, details of responses and agreed implementation dates. Following the tabling of the government response, the Ministerial and Parliamentary section is required to provide this information to the Governance, Assurance and Risk Branch, which is responsible for monitoring implementation of agreed recommendations (see paragraph 2.35).

2.24 NIAA provides input to a whole-of-government document on the status of government responses to parliamentary committee reports, which is co-ordinated by PM&C (see paragraph 3.19).

Implementing parliamentary committee recommendations

2.26 Timely and successful implementation of parliamentary committee recommendations is facilitated by fit-for-purpose and proportionate implementation planning that sets clear responsibilities and timeframes for delivering the action that was agreed to in the government response. The nature of an implementation plan may vary depending on the complexity of a recommendation. Where implementation plans are not prepared, previous ANAO audits have shown that actions are not always implemented in a timely way or at all.³¹

2.27 Table 2.2 shows the ANAO’s assessment of IBA’s and NIAA’s implementation planning practices for agreed parliamentary committee recommendations as at August 2024.

Table 2.2: Assessment of implementation planning practices for agreed parliamentary committee recommendations, as at August 2024

Key: ■ Practice not documented or established ▲ Practice established and not documented  Practice documented and not established ◆ Practice documented and established

Note a: IBA documented new requirements for assigning responsibility, timeframes and risk ratings in April 2024. As at August 2024, these were not established as IBA had not received new parliamentary committee recommendations.

Note b: NIAA documented new requirements for assigning responsibility, timeframes and risk ratings in August 2024.

Source: ANAO analysis of IBA and NIAA documentation.

Indigenous Business Australia

2.28 In April 2024, IBA documented requirements to develop an implementation plan and assign a risk rating for agreed JCPAA and Auditor-General recommendations. IBA established an implementation plan template that includes fields for the responsible business area, actions to be taken, key deliverables, due dates and status of each action. These requirements were extended to recommendations from other parliamentary committees in August 2024 (see paragraph 2.15).

National Indigenous Australians Agency

2.29 In August 2024, NIAA documented requirements to develop an implementation plan for agreed parliamentary committee and Auditor-General recommendations, to be approved by relevant Senior Executive Service (SES) Band 2 officials within one month of the date the recommendation is agreed.³² An implementation plan template includes fields for responsible officers, activities and milestones, an implementation timeframe and a risk rating and mitigations.

Monitoring and assurance of implementation of parliamentary committee recommendations

2.30 Effective monitoring requires fit-for-purpose tracking of implementation progress. What constitutes fit for purpose will depend on the size of the entity, the nature of its business, its governance structure and the number and frequency of recommendations requiring attention.

2.31 Entities are required to establish an audit committee to provide independent advice and assurance to the entity’s accountability authority, including on the entity’s system of internal control.³³

• IBA’s Audit, Risk and Performance Committee (ARPC) charter states that the role of the ARPC to provide ‘advice, assurance and support’ to the IBA Board. The charter states that the ARPC should satisfy itself that IBA has appropriate mechanisms for reviewing relevant external reports, including parliamentary committee reports, and implementing recommendations.
• NIAA’s ARC charter states that the role of the ARC is to provide ‘independence advice and assistance’ to the Chief Executive Officer including on the appropriateness of NIAA’s system of internal control. The charter states that the ARC’s consideration of NIAA’s control framework includes ‘relevant parliamentary committee reports and external reviews, internal and ANAO audit reports, providing advice to the Chief Executive Officer about significant issues identified and the implementation of agreed actions’.

Indigenous Business Australia

2.32 In April 2024, IBA documented responsibilities and practices for monitoring and assurance of the implementation of parliamentary committee recommendations. IBA’s Risk and Assurance section is responsible for tracking the implementation of recommendations in a register and reporting to the ARPC.

National Indigenous Australians Agency

2.33 In November 2021, NIAA’s ARC requested a paper describing NIAA’s processes to identify and monitor agreed recommendations from external reviews and parliamentary committee inquiries, and that NIAA develop a register of open recommendations. The paper was provided to the ARC in June 2022, which stated that no centralised register was used to monitor responses to recommendations. The paper did not describe arrangements to monitor implementation of agreed recommendations. In June 2022, the ARC requested updates on implementation of parliamentary recommendations. Updates were first provided in March 2024 (see paragraph 2.35). As at August 2024, a register of open recommendations had not been implemented.

2.34 Auditor-General Report No. 29 2023–24 Remote employment programs examined NIAA’s response to four agreed parliamentary committee recommendations relating to the Community Development Program.³⁴ The audit report, presented for tabling in May 2024, included a recommendation that NIAA ensure that its ARC is providing assurance to the accountable authority that agreed parliamentary committee recommendations are implemented.³⁵ NIAA agreed to the recommendation and stated that, ‘An updated approach was implemented in December 2023 which addresses this recommendation.’³⁶

2.35 NIAA’s practices for monitoring and assurance of the implementation of parliamentary committee recommendations developed between November 2023 and August 2024.

• In November 2023, NIAA advised the ARC that it would align its process for monitoring and closing parliamentary recommendations with its process for monitoring Auditor-General recommendations. The process for monitoring Auditor-General recommendations included tracking recommendations in a register, which listed the responsible officer, implementation status and implementation date for each recommendation. NIAA also advised the ARC it would complete a ‘stocktake’ of parliamentary committee recommendations, which would involve confirming ‘appropriate lead areas’ and considering ‘the potential impact of agreed recommendations on other portfolio agencies’. In December 2023, the NIAA Chief Operating Officer provided the same advice to the Executive Board. As at August 2024, as noted at paragraph 2.33, there was no register.
• In March 2024 and June 2024, NIAA provided updates on implementation of parliamentary committee recommendations to the ARC. The updates included a list of nine parliamentary committee reports and, for each report the total number of agreed recommendations ‘with direct NIAA responsibility’. Recommendations were classified into five implementation status categories. Of the 37 recommendations summarised in the table, four were ‘completed’, 13 were ‘ongoing’, one was ‘largely implemented’, two were ‘partially implemented’, and 17 were ‘not implemented’. Information was provided at the aggregate level for each report, no information was provided on the implementation status of individual recommendations, responsible officers or implementation dates.
• In August 2024, NIAA documented responsibilities and practices for monitoring agreed parliamentary committee and Auditor-General recommendations. NIAA’s Governance, Assurance and Risk Branch is responsible for requesting quarterly implementation updates from business areas, including actions taken, status relative to the established timeframe, and an update on the risk rating if required. The Governance, Assurance and Risk Branch is responsible for reporting to the ARC and Executive Board on all outstanding recommendations and changes to timeframes and risk ratings.

Closure of parliamentary committee recommendations

2.36 When recommendations have been implemented, it is important they are formally closed and that prior to closure, evidence of implementation is subject to an appropriate level of scrutiny to ensure recommendations have been implemented in full in accordance with the intent of the recommendation.

Indigenous Business Australia

2.37 In April 2024, IBA documented a closure practice for agreed JCPAA recommendations. The practice requires preparation of a closure report that includes supporting evidence, which must be reviewed and approved by the Risk and Assurance section and relevant senior executive; and endorsed by the ARPC. This practice was extended to recommendations from other parliamentary committees in August 2024 (see paragraph 2.15).

National Indigenous Australians Agency

2.38 As noted in paragraph 2.35, NIAA advised the ARC and Executive Board in November 2023 and December 2023 respectively that it would implement a practice for closing agreed parliamentary committee recommendations that aligned with its established practice for closing Auditor-General recommendations (see paragraph 2.60).

2.39 In August 2024, NIAA documented a closure practice for agreed parliamentary committee and Auditor-General recommendations. This practice requires preparation of a closure report with supporting evidence of implementation, which requires approval by the relevant SES Band 2 official and the Head of Internal Audit. A closure report template sets out relevant considerations for closing recommendations, which are that actions taken in response to the recommendation: have addressed the whole scope of the recommendation and response; have been finalised and embedded; and are supported by sufficient evidence.³⁷ Closure reports are required to be provided to the ARC for noting, and a report on closed recommendations must be provided to the Executive Board. The Governance, Assurance and Risk Branch is responsible for recording documentation and approvals.

Are arrangements to manage Auditor-General recommendations fit for purpose?

2.40 Auditor-General reports are prepared for the Parliament. Where entities agree to Auditor-General recommendations this represents a commitment to the Parliament that the entity will undertake the actions agreed to.³⁸

2.41 Figure 2.2 illustrates IBA’s and NIAA’s practices to identify and respond to; implement; monitor and assure; and close agreed Auditor-General recommendations as at August 2024. ‘Documented’ practices refer to practices that are clearly set out in documented procedures or guidance. ‘Established’ practices refer to actions that are consistently followed to achieve an outcome.

Figure 2.2: Practices to respond to, implement and monitor agreed Auditor-General recommendations, as at August 2024

Note a: Refers to implementation planning activities.

Note b: ‘Monitoring’ refers to the administrative process of compiling updates on the implementation of recommendations and preparing reporting for oversight and assurance bodies.

Note c: Both entities report closure of recommendations to their audit committees. IBA’s closure process requires the audit committee’s endorsement. NIAA’s process does not (see paragraphs 2.58 and 2.61).

Note d: IBA documented its practices in April 2024 after this audit commenced. As IBA did not have new Auditor-General recommendations as at August 2024, it had not established new documented requirements for implementation planning.

Source: ANAO analysis of IBA and NIAA documentation.

Identifying and responding to Auditor-General recommendations

2.42 The Auditor-General is required to provide a copy, or extract, of each proposed audit report to the accountable authority of an entity involved in the audit, and request written comments within 28 days. The Auditor-General is required to include all written comments received from entities in the final report.³⁹ NIAA and IBA responded to all Auditor-General recommendations.

2.43 In their responses to Auditor-General recommendations, entities should clearly state whether they agree to implement the audit recommendation. IBA and NIAA agreed to all Auditor-General recommendations assessed as part of this audit.

Indigenous Business Australia

2.44 In April 2024, IBA documented its established practices for coordinating, drafting and approving responses to Auditor-General recommendations. Responses are required to be drafted by responsible officers, with input from the Risk and Assurance section, the General Counsel and the executive for the relevant business areas, and approved by the Chief Executive Officer. The accountable authority of IBA is the Board. IBA has not documented the process for the accountable authority to approve responses to Auditor-General recommendations.

National Indigenous Australians Agency

2.46 Before November 2022, PM&C’s Ministerial Support Division was responsible for coordinating responses to Auditor-General recommendations directed to NIAA. Following the end of the shared service arrangement with PM&C (see paragraph 2.4), responses to Auditor-General recommendations were coordinated by NIAA’s Governance, Assurance and Risk Branch, with input from business areas. The final response is approved by the Chief Executive Officer, the accountable authority of NIAA. These practices were documented in August 2024.

Implementing Auditor-General recommendations

2.47 Table 2.3 shows the ANAO’s assessment of IBA’s and NIAA’s practices for implementation planning for agreed Auditor-General recommendations as at August 2024.

Table 2.3: Assessment of implementation planning practices for agreed Auditor-General recommendations, as at August 2024

Key: ■ Practice not documented or established ▲ Practice established and not documented   Practice documented and not established  ◆ Practice documented and established

Note a: IBA documented new requirements for assigning timeframes and risk ratings in April 2024. As at August 2024, these were not established as IBA had not received new Auditor-General recommendations.

Note b: NIAA documented a new requirement for assigning risk ratings in August 2024.

Source: ANAO analysis of IBA and NIAA documentation.

Indigenous Business Australia

2.48 IBA did not require implementation plans for agreed Auditor-General recommendations until April 2024. As noted at paragraph 2.28, in April 2024, IBA documented practices for implementation planning including a requirement to assign a responsible officer, assign a risk rating, and develop an implementation plan (including due dates for planned actions) for the recommendation, within 10 business days of accepting it. It also created an implementation plan template.

National Indigenous Australians Agency

2.49 In October 2023, at the request of the ARC, NIAA developed an implementation plan for seven recommendations in Auditor-General Report No. 27 2022–23 Management of provider fraud and non-compliance.⁴⁰ The plan includes activities, timeframes, responsible and accountable officers, and stakeholders consulted and informed for all seven recommendations. In August 2024, NIAA developed an implementation plan for eight recommendations in Auditor-General Report No. 29 2023–24 Remote employment programs.⁴¹ The plan includes activities, timeframes and responsible officers for all eight recommendations and risk ratings for six recommendations.

2.50 NIAA did not require implementation plans for agreed Auditor-General recommendations until August 2024. As noted at paragraph 2.29, in August 2024, NIAA documented practices for implementation planning for agreed Auditor-General recommendations, including a requirement to assign a responsible officer, assign a risk rating, and develop an implementation plan and timeframe for agreed recommendations within one month.⁴²

Monitoring and assurance of implementation of Auditor-General recommendations

Indigenous Business Australia

2.51 IBA documented its established monitoring and assurance arrangements for Auditor-General recommendations in April 2024. IBA’s Risk and Assurance section maintains an ‘Audit and Review Recommendation Register’ based on input from responsible business areas. The Audit and Review Recommendation Register shows responsible officers and is updated by responsible officers. The Register does not show due dates for agreed Auditor-General recommendations. It categorises their implementation status.⁴³ Where a recommendation is at risk of not being implemented by the due date (see paragraph 2.48), the responsible officer is required to provide an update to IBA’s Risk and Assurance section on the cause of the delay and controls to manage the risk.

2.52 The Audit and Review Recommendation Register is provided to the ARPC for assurance over implementation. The ARPC and CEO provide written updates to the IBA Board, which include information on actions taken in response to recommendations.

National Indigenous Australians Agency

2.53 NIAA’s monitoring arrangements for Auditor-General recommendations were documented in the 2019 Memorandum of Understanding with PM&C. Following the end of the shared services arrangement in November 2022 (see paragraph 2.4), reporting to the ARC and Executive Board in November 2023 and December 2023 included a summary of NIAA’s practices for monitoring and closing Auditor-General recommendations. These practices were documented in internal guidance in August 2024 (see paragraph 2.35).

2.54 NIAA maintains an ‘Audit Recommendations Report’ based on input from responsible business areas. The Audit Recommendations Report captures responsible officers, implementation due dates, and updates provided by responsible officers and the Head of Internal Audit. At the direction of the Executive Board in October 2023, NIAA developed a more detailed implementation tracking document for seven Auditor-General recommendations in Auditor-General Report No. 27 2022–23 Management of provider fraud and non-compliance. The tracking document was used to provide monthly implementation updates to the Senior Leadership Committee (an advisory body to the Executive Board).

2.55 Assurance arrangements for Auditor-General recommendations are documented in the ARC charter. The Audit Recommendation Report is provided to the ARC. In October 2023, the ARC provided a general update to the NIAA CEO on its monitoring of recommendations from Auditor-General Report No. 27 2022–23 Management of provider fraud and non-compliance.

2.56 From August 2024, the Governance, Assurance and Risk Branch was responsible for reporting to the Executive Board on all outstanding recommendations and changes to timeframes and risk ratings (see paragraph 2.35).

Closure of Auditor-General recommendations

Indigenous Business Australia

2.57 Prior to September 2022, IBA did not have an established closure practice for Auditor-General recommendations. In September 2022, the ARPC requested that IBA provide the ARPC with information on the actions taken to close recommendations and evidence used to support closure. The ARPC also requested that recommendations being closed be identified on the Audit and Review Recommendation Register provided to the ARPC at each meeting. In November 2022, IBA established a closure practice involving the preparation of a closure report. A closure report template was based on a template used for internal audit recommendations and included fields such as ‘Summary of Completed Actions’ and ‘Supporting Evidence’. The closure report template does not address risk. The closure report must be approved by the Senior Manager, Risk and Assurance.

2.58 In April 2024, IBA documented its closure practice, which requires approval from more senior managers including the Chief Executive Officer prior to endorsement from the ARPC. The documented practice requires closure reports to be presented to the ARPC. The closure report template was updated in April 2024 to require a risk rating.

2.59 IBA’s documented closure practice does not involve the Board. In practice, the Board is advised by the ARPC and the CEO when recommendations are closed. The Board does not approve closure of recommendations.

National Indigenous Australians Agency

2.60 NIAA prepares closure reports for Auditor-General recommendations, using a closure report template which includes fields for ‘implementation status’ (completed actions and actions taken to address underlying risks); ‘assessment of recommendation’; and supporting evidence. The template includes a field for Head of Internal Audit approval and states that ‘unambiguous written approval’ from an SES Band 2 official must be attached as evidence. Under the shared services arrangement with PM&C (see paragraph 2.4), until November 2022 PM&C was responsible for quality assurance of NIAA closure reports for Auditor-General recommendations prior to Head of Internal Audit approval. In June 2023, NIAA advised the ARC that, ‘where previously a recommendation may have been closed on the development of a new policy, it will now need evidence of how its [sic] working in practice to demonstrate completion’. In November 2023, the closure report template was updated to reflect the implementation status categories used by the ANAO. For the recommendations examined in this audit, approvals were poorly documented in closure reports (see paragraph 3.40).

2.61 NIAA reports closure of Auditor-General recommendations to the ARC. For the recommendations examined in this audit, minutes of the relevant meetings described the ARC as having ‘endorsed’, ‘approved’ or ‘agreed’ recommendations for closure (see paragraph 3.41). Meeting minutes do not record which recommendations were considered by the ARC. In June 2023, NIAA advised the ARC that its closure process does not require endorsement by the ARC.⁴⁴

2.62 Closure reports were not consistently provided to the ARC for its assurance over the process. Between April 2020 and March 2024, NIAA reported the closure of 28 Auditor-General recommendations to the ARC, and provided closure reports for 16. In June 2024, closure reports were provided for all four recommendations reported closed. In March 2021, the ARC requested that where closure reports are not provided, details of actions undertaken to implement recommendations be recorded in the Audit Recommendations Report. NIAA subsequently recorded high-level updates on actions undertaken to implement recommendations in the Audit Recommendations Report (see paragraphs 3.37 to 3.38). However, these updates did not provide the ARC with evidence to demonstrate that agreed actions had been implemented.

2.63 NIAA reporting to the ARC and Executive Board in November 2023 and December 2023 included a summary of its practices for closing Auditor-General recommendations. NIAA documented these practices in August 2024, including a new requirement that all closure reports be provided to the ARC and Executive Board for noting (see paragraph 2.39).

3.1 Tabling guidelines published by PM&C require that government responses to parliamentary committee recommendations are approved by the Cabinet, Prime Minister, or a minister, depending on the circumstances.⁴⁵ Australian Government entities are responsible for preparing and advising government on responses to parliamentary committee recommendations (see paragraph 1.6) in accordance with the tabling guidelines and timeframes for receiving government responses set by the Parliament (see paragraph 1.5).

3.2 IBA was not the subject of parliamentary committee recommendations in the timeframe examined in this audit. To assess whether NIAA effectively responded to recommendations, the ANAO examined NIAA’s advice to government for responding to two parliamentary committee reports (see paragraph 3.5).

3.3 Effective and timely implementation of agreed parliamentary and Auditor-General recommendations demonstrates accountability to the Parliament and contributes to realising the full benefit of a parliamentary committee inquiry or an audit.

3.4 To assess whether IBA and NIAA effectively implemented agreed recommendations, the ANAO examined IBA’s implementation of four agreed Auditor-General recommendations and NIAA’s implementation of 21 agreed recommendations, comprising 10 parliamentary committee recommendations and 11 Auditor-General recommendations (Table 3.1). For details of the selected reports and recommendations, see Appendix 5.

Table 3.1: Parliamentary committee and Auditor-General recommendations reviewed

Source: ANAO analysis.

Was government appropriately advised on how to respond?

3.5 The ANAO examined NIAA’s advice to government for responding to the two parliamentary committee reports where NIAA was the lead entity (see paragraph 2.8):

• House of Representatives Standing Committee on Indigenous Affairs, Report on food pricing and food security in remote Indigenous communities, tabled 7 December 2020 (food pricing report); and
• House of Representatives Standing Committee on Indigenous Affairs, Report on Indigenous Participation in Employment and Business, tabled 30 August 2021 (Indigenous participation report).⁴⁶

Advice on timeliness and process of responding

3.6 For the two reports, NIAA provided draft responses and associated advice to the minister, however it did not do so in a timely manner that in turn enabled the minister to table government responses in the timeframes required by the Parliament (see Table 3.2).

Table 3.2: Timeliness of NIAA advice

Note a: Government responses to House of Representatives committee reports can only be tabled when the House of Representatives is sitting. The due date for the government response is taken to be the last sitting day within the six-month timeframe established by the House.

Source: ANAO analysis of NIAA documentation.

3.7 As noted in paragraph 2.18, in September 2023 NIAA documented practices for responding to parliamentary committee recommendations. The documented practices include the timeframes set by the Parliament for receiving government responses to parliamentary committee reports. They do not include recommended or required timeframes to allow for input from other relevant entities and portfolios, ministerial consideration and government approval.

3.9 NIAA advised the minister on the process for approving and tabling government responses for the two reports, however advice did not consistently set out the required steps and relevant timeframes for responding.

• Food pricing report — NIAA provided advice to the minister on four occasions between December 2020 and November 2021. Advice to the minister in December 2020 did not state that the response was required to be endorsed by the Prime Minister or the Cabinet and tabled in the Parliament and incorrectly stated that the timeframe for responding was three months. In February 2021, the minister’s office requested advice on the process in the event the response was not approved in the required timeframe. Advice to the minister in April 2021 stated the required timeframe. It did not include the information requested by the minister’s office. NIAA first advised the minister of the required steps for approving and tabling the response in October 2021, four months after the response was due.
• Indigenous participation report — NIAA advised the minister of the required steps for approving and tabling the response in February 2022, the month the response was due. NIAA did not advise the minister of the timeframe for responding.

3.10 The tabling guidelines require that government responses, once approved, are tabled as soon as possible, and that a copy of the response is provided by the minister to the chair of the relevant parliamentary committee prior to the response being tabled.⁴⁷ NIAA provided the minister with draft letters to the relevant committee chair with a copy of the responses, but there is no evidence that the letters were sent to the chairs prior to tabling. The response to each report was tabled on the second House sitting day following endorsement by the Prime Minister.

Advice on substance of responses

3.11 The tabling guidelines require that government responses:

• address all recommendations (including minority or dissenting recommendations in Senate and joint committee reports, and excluding recommendations directed to the Presiding Officers);
• indicate reasons for not accepting any recommendations; and
• are prepared using a specific cover sheet that provides the name of the committee, report title and tabling date.⁴⁸

3.12 The Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit (JCPAA) publishes guidance to assist entities in preparing government responses to JCPAA recommendations. The guidance states that responses should:

• address the substance and intent of each recommendation and related report content;
• state whether the recommendation is agreed, agreed with qualification; or not agreed, and explain the rationale for this position;
• outline action taken or planned, and a timeframe to implement each recommendation that is agreed or agreed with qualification; and
• address relevant issues concisely and be free of extraneous detail.⁴⁹

3.13 Responses prepared by NIAA addressed each of the 33 recommendations in the two reports (Table 3.3), and the cover sheet template was used.

Table 3.3: Summary of government responses to selected reports

Source: ANAO analysis of NIAA documentation.

3.14 Of the 15 recommendations that were not accepted (noted or not agreed), reasons for not accepting nine recommendations were clearly stated in the proposed responses.⁵⁰ Proposed responses to six recommendations did not explicitly state why the recommendation was not accepted.⁵¹ Proposed responses did not outline actions taken or planned for two of the 18 recommendations that were ‘agreed’ or ‘agreed in principle’. The rationale for the use of the terms ‘noted’ and ‘agreed in principle’ was not clear.

3.15 In providing proposed government responses to the minister for consideration, NIAA did not provide supporting advice to the minister for most recommendations.

• Food pricing report — Of the 16 recommendations, the minister was responsible for implementation of 13. Of these 13 recommendations, NIAA provided advice on implementation details or actions for 10; risks or sensitivities for three; and a timeframe for actions for three. Of the 10 recommendations agreed or agreed in principle for which the minister was responsible, NIAA did not provide supporting advice to the minister for two.
• Indigenous participation report — Of the 17 recommendations, NIAA provided advice on implementation details or actions for three; risks or sensitivities for two; and a timeframe for none. For one recommendation that was ‘noted’, NIAA advised the minister that there was no legal authority for the recommended action. Of the eight recommendations agreed or agreed in principle, NIAA did not provide supporting advice to the minister for seven.⁵²

3.17 In February 2024, the Department of Finance agreed to an Auditor-General recommendation to review its whole-of-government guidance to entities to reinforce the benefits of having arrangements to monitor the implementation of agreed parliamentary committee recommendations.⁵³ The tabling guidelines issued by PM&C require that government responses to parliamentary committee reports address all recommendations and indicate reasons for not accepting recommendations (see paragraph 3.11). They do not include guidance on preparing advice to assist government to respond the substance of recommendations, or on the use of terms such as ‘agreed in principle’ and ‘noted’ in proposed responses. The guidelines do not include timeframes for providing advice to government, which would support the government in meeting Parliament’s expectations.

Advice on outstanding government responses

3.19 Twice annually, following the tabling of the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives’ status reports on outstanding government responses to parliamentary committee reports (see paragraph 1.8), PM&C seeks advice from entities on the status of responses for which they are responsible. Entities’ advice informs two whole-of-government documents: ‘Status of government responses in the Senate to parliamentary committee reports’ and ‘Status of government responses in the House of Representatives to parliamentary committee reports’ (government status reports), which are also tabled in the Parliament.⁵⁴ For all parliamentary committee reports with outstanding government responses, the government status reports use a standard phrase to describe the report’s status: ‘The Government’s response is being considered.’⁵⁵

3.20 On seven occasions between October 2020 and June 2024, NIAA provided advice to the minister on the status of government responses to parliamentary committee reports in the Indigenous affairs portfolio. On each occasion NIAA sought the minister’s agreement to the content to be included in the government status reports. Prior to October 2022, NIAA’s advice to the minister included information to assist the minister to understand the reasons why responses were outstanding.⁵⁶ In October 2022, NIAA stopped including this information in its advice.⁵⁷ In response to the October 2022 advice that lacked this information, the minister stated that a decision needed to be made on which reports required responses. NIAA took no action in response to the minister’s request. NIAA provided the list of outstanding reports to the minister on three further occasions between May 2023 and May 2024 without this information.

3.21 In March 2024, the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister (the assistant minister) requested that a ‘standard response’ to outstanding parliamentary committee recommendations be issued for all reports tabled prior to May 2022, unless the relevant minister considered a different response was required (see paragraph 1.11). In April 2024, NIAA recommended that the Minister for Indigenous Australians approve a ‘standard response’ to 10 parliamentary committee reports that had been tabled between September 2010 and February 2022, which collectively included 39 recommendations.⁵⁸ The proposed response to each report would ‘note’ each recommendation and state, ‘given the passage of time since this report was tabled, a substantive Government response is no longer appropriate’, in line with the assistant minister’s request. NIAA’s advice to the minister stated that NIAA endorsed the proposed approach. It did not include information to support the minister’s assessment of whether a different response was warranted. In May 2024, the minister requested that a summary of achievements or current work be included in the proposed government response to each report. Revised responses were provided to the minister in August 2024. As at August 2024, government responses to the 10 reports had not been tabled.

Was there fit-for-purpose implementation planning?

3.22 The ANAO examined whether, for each of the selected recommendations, IBA and NIAA: developed an implementation plan or undertook planning activities (identified actions required for implementation; assigned responsibility for implementation; assigned a risk rating; or established an implementation timeframe).

Indigenous Business Australia

3.23 As discussed at paragraph 2.28, IBA documented a requirement to develop implementation plans for agreed Auditor-General recommendations in April 2024, which post-dates the Auditor-General recommendations to IBA examined in this audit. IBA did not have an implementation plan for the four Auditor-General recommendations examined in the audit. Elements of implementation planning were partly undertaken (Table 3.4).

Table 3.4: IBA’s implementation planning for selected Auditor-General recommendations

Key: ✔ Activity undertaken ✘ Activity not undertaken

Source: ANAO analysis of IBA documentation.

National Indigenous Australians Agency

Parliamentary committee recommendations

3.24 As discussed at paragraph 2.29, NIAA documented a requirement to develop implementation plans for agreed parliamentary committee and Auditor-General recommendations in August 2024, which post-dates the recommendations to NIAA examined in this audit. Implementation plans may vary depending on the nature of the recommendation. NIAA developed an implementation plan for three of 10 parliamentary committee recommendations examined in this audit. Elements of implementation planning were not consistently undertaken (Table 3.5).

Key: ✔ Activity undertaken ✘ Activity not undertaken

Note a: Business areas involved in preparing the government response to parliamentary committee recommendations were also involved in implementing agreed actions, however NIAA did not explicitly assign responsible officers as part of implementation planning for agreed recommendations. NIAA advised the ANAO of responsible business areas for all 10 recommendations in March 2024.

Note b: A timeframe was established for actions relating to the recommendation, but not for its full implementation.

Source: ANAO analysis of NIAA documentation.

Auditor-General recommendations

3.25 NIAA developed an implementation plan for two of 11 Auditor-General recommendations examined in this audit. NIAA assigned responsibility for the implementation of all 11. Other elements of implementation planning were not consistently undertaken (Table 3.6).

Key: ✔ Activity undertaken ✘ Activity not undertaken

Note a: An implementation plan was developed and finalised after actions to implement the recommendation were completed (see paragraph 3.26).

Note b: Possible delays to implementation were identified in an implementation plan, however no risk rating was assigned (see paragraph 3.26).

Note c: While a risk rating was not explicitly assigned to the recommendation, related risks were assessed in a risk management plan developed by NIAA for the National Partnership for Remote Housing Northern Territory.

Note d: A timeframe was first established after actions taken to implement the recommendation had been completed.

Source: ANAO analysis of NIAA documentation.

3.26 NIAA developed an implementation plan for the five agreed recommendations in Auditor-General Report No. 18 2021–22 Remote Housing in the Northern Territory. The implementation plan was developed in April 2022 by the responsible business area at the request of NIAA’s internal audit function to assist with ‘assessing progress against implementation’. The implementation plan included an implementation date; responsible officer; ‘key actions and milestones’; and ‘risks to implementation’ for each recommendation. The implementation plan included a field for a ‘risk rating’ to be assigned to each recommendation, however risks ratings were not assigned to the five recommendations.⁵⁹ The implementation plan was approved on 28 April 2022, and three of the five recommendations were completed between January 2022 and March 2022.⁶⁰

Was there effective monitoring, assurance and closure?

Indigenous Business Australia

3.27 As discussed at paragraph 2.51, IBA monitors the implementation of Auditor-General recommendations in a register that is provided to the Audit, Risk and Performance Committee (ARPC). As part of its management of the four recommendations in Auditor-General Report No. 36 2020–21 Indigenous Business Australia’s Business Support and Investment Activities, IBA separated the four recommendations into eight sub-recommendations, each tracked separately in the register.

3.28 IBA provided updates to the ARPC on the implementation of the recommendations at relevant meetings following the tabling of the Auditor-General report on 7 May 2021. Table 3.7 summarises the quality of IBA’s reporting to the ARPC. All the recommendations were closed by July 2024. General information on implementation progress was also provided by the ARPC and CEO to the Board (see paragraph 2.52).

Key: ■ No update or repeated response from the report ▲ Repeated previous update ◆ New update ✔ Closure reported  
– Not applicable (recommendation considered by IBA to be completed)

Note a: Table does not show ARPC meetings in July 2021, July 2022 and July 2023 that focused on draft financial and annual performance statements.

Note b: The ARPC meeting in May 2021 was held 11 days following the tabling of the report. A detailed update was not provided. IBA advised the ARPC that recommendations would be tracked in the recommendation register and provided to the committee for review at every meeting.

Note c: Categorised ‘completed’ in IBA’s Audit and Review Recommendation Register.

Note d: ARPC requested information on implementation and evidence to support closure (see paragraph 3.30).

Note e: Sub-recommendation reopened after IBA identified there was insufficient evidence to support closure (see paragraph 3.30).

Source: ANAO analysis of IBA documentation.

3.29 Between September 2021 to September 2022, reporting largely repeated responses to recommendations included in the Auditor-General report. IBA recorded the status of six sub-recommendations as ‘completed’ in its recommendations register. Three of these sub-recommendations (A2.2, A3.1 and A3.2)⁶¹ were reported as ‘completed’ without an update to the ARPC beyond re-stating the recommendation and response included in the Auditor-General report.

3.30 In September 2022, the ARPC requested information on the actions taken to close recommendations and evidence used to support closure (see paragraph 2.57). IBA prepared closure reports for five of the six sub-recommendations that had been recorded as ‘completed’ in the recommendations register between September 2021 and September 2022. The closure reports were provided to the ARPC in November 2022. All five closure reports included supporting evidence of actions taken and approvals from the Executive Director of the relevant business area and the Senior Manager, Risk and Assurance. IBA identified that there was insufficient evidence to support the closure of one of the six sub-recommendations (A2.2). IBA reopened the sub-recommendation and its status in the register changed from ‘completed’ to ‘everything is on track in terms of completing the recommendation within timeframe or agreed extended timeframe’.

3.31 IBA’s reporting to the ARPC on recommendation A2.2 and the two remaining sub-recommendations (A2.1 and A4.3) became more detailed from November 2022. IBA prepared closure reports for the three sub-recommendations with supporting evidence and required approvals, which were provided to the ARPC in July 2024.

National Indigenous Australians Agency

Parliamentary committee recommendations

3.32 NIAA’s Audit and Risk Committee (ARC) charter states that the ARC’s role includes providing advice to the accountable authority about significant issues identified in parliamentary committee reports and the implementation of agreed actions. NIAA documented practices for monitoring implementation of agreed parliamentary committee and Auditor-General recommendations, including reporting to the ARC, in August 2024 (see paragraph 2.33).

3.33 NIAA first provided an update on implementation of parliamentary committee recommendations to the ARC in March 2024. The update included the three parliamentary committee reports examined in this audit. It did not specify the status of individual recommendations (see paragraph 2.35).⁶² For the 2021 Indigenous participation report (see paragraph 3.5), the update stated there were seven recommendations with direct NIAA responsibility. All seven recommendations were categorised as ‘not implemented’. NIAA advised the ARC that ‘Employment related recommendation updates are being sought based on new policy approach. This approach is likely to influence implementation status of agreed recommendations.’ An update in June 2024 added that ‘The Economic Empowerment Group are currently ascribing responsibility to people for these recommendations, and work is progressing.’

3.34 Entities are expected to provide regular updates to ministers on progress implementing parliamentary committee recommendations (see paragraph 1.7). NIAA provided general information on actions related to eight of the 10 agreed recommendations examined in this audit. Actions planned and taken in response to two of the eight recommendations (P3 and P10) were also included in a report provided to the minister six times in 2023. The report was prepared by NIAA to provide advice on the implementation of government commitments, and included current and forecast status, risks and issues, and an overall delivery status rating for each commitment. NIAA did not provide the minister with a by-recommendation status report for agreed parliamentary committee recommendations.

3.35 NIAA considered three of the 10 parliamentary committee recommendations examined in this audit to be implemented or partly implemented (P2, P4 and P9). NIAA did not prepare closure reports for the three recommendations. NIAA documented practices for closing parliamentary committee recommendations and Auditor-General recommendations in August 2024 (see paragraph 2.39).

Auditor-General recommendations

3.36 As discussed at paragraph 2.53, NIAA monitors the implementation of Auditor-General recommendations in a register that is provided to the ARC.

3.37 NIAA provided updates to the ARC on implementation of all 11 Auditor-General recommendations examined in this audit at each relevant meeting. Table 3.8 summarises the quality of NIAA’s reporting to the ARC at each meeting where an update was provided up to November 2022, when all recommendations were closed.

Key: ■ No update or repeated response from the report ▲ Repeated previous update ◆ New update ✔ Closure reported  – Not applicable

Note a: Table does not show ARC meetings in May 2020 and August 2020 that focused on draft financial and annual performance statements.

Note b: The ARC requested that the Head of Internal Audit determine if the recommendation could be closed. In June 2021, NIAA reported to the ARC that actions were outstanding.

Note c: The ARC meeting in March 2022 was held 15 days following the tabling of the report.

Source: ANAO analysis of NIAA documentation.

3.38 Reporting on recommendations included information on actions taken and reasons for delays to implementation. For three recommendations (A7, A8 and A9), the first update beyond re-stating the recommendation and response in the relevant Auditor-General report was provided six months after the relevant report was tabled. One recommendation (A6) was closed six months after the relevant report was tabled without an update beyond re-stating the recommendation and response (see Table 3.8).

3.39 Although it has a template for closure reports, NIAA did not have a documented requirement or practice for closing Auditor-General recommendations until August 2024 (see paragraph 2.63). NIAA considered all 11 Auditor-General recommendations examined in this audit to be implemented (see Table 3.15). NIAA prepared closure reports for all 11 recommendations. Closure reports for 10 recommendations included supporting evidence of actions taken. For one recommendation (A11), evidence was not included in, or provided with, the closure report. The ANAO assessed this recommendation to be partly implemented (see Table 3.15).

3.40 NIAA’s closure report template requires approval by the responsible Senior Executive Service (SES) Band 2 official and the Head of Internal Audit (see paragraph 2.60). Approval of closure was poorly documented in the closure reports examined.

• The name of the responsible SES officer was included in all 11 closure reports, but none of the closure reports included the date that closure of the recommendation was approved. Evidence of approval was attached to one closure report.
• Head of Internal Audit approval was included in six of the 11 closure reports in the form of a comment stating that the recommendation was approved for closure. Approval, when included, was not dated.

3.41 Closure of all 11 recommendations was reported to the ARC, however closure reports for 10 of the 11 were not provided to the ARC. Closure of all 11 recommendations was either ‘endorsed’, ‘approved’ or ‘agreed’ by the ARC. Minutes of the relevant meetings did not record details of the closed recommendations and simply listed the total number of recommendations.

Were recommendations implemented?

3.43 The ANAO assessed the implementation status against the intention of the recommendation for the 25 recommendations examined in this audit as at August 2024 (for details of the selected recommendations, see Table 3.1 and Appendix 5). The assessment categories used are set out in Table 3.9. Where a response to an agreed recommendation included commitments that were additional to the recommendation or its intent, the ANAO also assessed implementation of these additional commitments.

Table 3.9: Implementation status of recommendations — assessment categories

Source: ANAO documentation.

3.44 A summary of the ANAO’s assessment of IBA and NIAA’s implementation of agreed recommendations, against the intention of the original recommendation, is set out in Table 3.10.

Table 3.10: Assessment of IBA and NIAA’s implementation of selected recommendations, at August 2024 — overview

Note a: Assessment is against the intention of the original recommendation and does not include consideration of commitments made in the government or entity response to the recommendation that were additional to the intention of the original recommendation.

Source: ANAO analysis of IBA and NIAA documentation.

Indigenous Business Australia’s implementation of Auditor-General recommendations

3.45 Table 3.11 shows the implementation status of the four agreed Auditor-General recommendations examined in this audit, comparing IBA and ANAO assessments. Appendix 5 provides the full text of each agreed recommendation.

Table 3.11: Assessment of IBA’s implementation of selected Auditor-General recommendations

Key: ANAO’s assessment differed from IBA’s assessment for the recommendations highlighted in the table.

Note a: The date indicates when IBA advised its audit committee that the recommendation was completed. The ANAO has taken closure of the recommendation to indicate that the recommendation was considered by IBA to be implemented unless closure documentation stated otherwise.

Note b: For this recommendation, the IBA response did not include commitments that were additional to the intention of the original recommendation.

Note c: IBA treated the recommendation as three sub-recommendations (see paragraph 3.27). IBA closed two of the sub-recommendations in May 2022 and closed the third sub-recommendation in July 2024 (see paragraphs 3.30 to 3.31).

Source: ANAO analysis of IBA documentation.

3.46 The ANAO’s assessment differed from IBA’s assessment for one recommendation (Table 3.12).

Table 3.12: Auditor-General Report No. 36 2020–21 Indigenous Business Australia’s Business Support and Investment Activities

Note a: Trend analysis was discontinuous for one measure (‘value of home ownership outcomes approved’) as IBA changed the metric to ‘number of home ownership outcomes approved’ in the 2021–22 Corporate Plan.

Source: ANAO analysis IBA documentation, including IBA’s corporate plans for 2020–21 to 2023–24 and annual reports for 2020–21 to 2022–23.

Timeliness

3.47 IBA did not establish timeframes for the implementation of Auditor-General recommendations examined in this audit (see Table 3.4). Updates to the ARPC provided indicative timeframes for two recommendations, however these timeframes were not met. The time between when the recommendations were agreed by IBA and when the recommendations were reported closed to the ARPC ranged from four to 37 months.

National Indigenous Australians Agency’s implementation of parliamentary committee recommendations

3.48 Table 3.13 shows the implementation status of the 10 agreed parliamentary committee recommendations relevant to NIAA examined in this audit, comparing NIAA and ANAO assessments. Appendix 5 provides the full text of each agreed recommendation.

Table 3.13: Assessment of NIAA’s implementation of selected parliamentary committee recommendations

Key: ANAO’s assessment differed from NIAA’s assessment for the recommendations highlighted in the table.

Note a: The date indicates when NIAA advised the ANAO of its assessment of implementation status.

Note b: For this recommendation, the government response did not include commitments that were additional to the intention of the original recommendation.

Note c: NIAA advised the ANAO in August 2024 that it considered the additional commitment was implemented.

Note d: NIAA advised the ANAO in March 2024 that the status of the recommendation was ‘implementation ongoing’. NIAA advised the ANAO in May 2024 that the recommendation was ‘resolved in accordance with the [government response]’.

Source: ANAO analysis of NIAA documentation.

3.49 When considering the intention of the original recommendation, the ANAO’s assessment of implementation was the same as NIAA’s for all recommendations in Table 3.14. When considering additional commitments made in the government’s response to the recommendation, the ANAO’s assessment differed from NIAA’s assessment (implementation ongoing) for one recommendation (Table 3.14).

Table 3.14: House of Representatives Standing Committee on Indigenous Affairs, Report on Indigenous Participation in Employment and Business (30 August 2021)

Note a: AusTender Standing Offer Notice SON3329485.

Source: ANAO analysis of NIAA documentation.

Timeliness

3.50 The NIAA established timeframes for actions relating to four of the 10 parliamentary committee recommendations examined in this audit. A timeframe for full implementation was established for only one recommendation (P3) (see Table 3.5), which as at August 2024 had not expired. A timeframe established in the government response to one recommendation (P6) was not met (see Table 3.14).

3.51 As at August 2024, implementation of seven recommendations was ongoing. The time since the recommendations were agreed by government ranged from 20 to 31 months.

National Indigenous Australians Agency’s implementation of Auditor-General recommendations

3.52 Table 3.15 shows the implementation status of the 11 agreed Auditor-General recommendations made to NIAA examined in this audit, comparing NIAA and ANAO assessments. Appendix 5 provides the full text of each agreed recommendation.

Table 3.15: Assessment of NIAA’s implementation of selected Auditor-General recommendations

Key: ANAO’s assessment differed from NIAA’s assessment for the recommendations highlighted in the table.

Note a: The date indicates when NIAA advised its audit committee that the recommendation was closed. NIAA advised the ANAO in March 2024 that the status of all recommendations was ‘implemented’.

Note b: For this recommendation, NIAA’s response did not include commitments that were additional to the intention of the original recommendation.

Note c: NIAA made the same additional commitment in response to three recommendations. Details of the ANAO’s assessment are provided in Table 3.18.

Source: ANAO analysis of NIAA documentation.

3.53 When considering the intention of the original recommendation, the ANAO’s assessment of implementation differed from NIAA’s assessment (implemented) for seven recommendations in three Auditor-General reports (Table 3.16 to Table 3.18). When considering additional commitments made in the NIAA’s response to the recommendation, the ANAO’s assessment differed from NIAA’s assessment (implemented) for three recommendations in one report (Table 3.18).

Table 3.16: Auditor-General Report No. 34 2019–20 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Participation Targets in Intergovernmental Agreements

Note a: NIAA, COAG Reporting Framework for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policies and Outcomes, available from https://www.niaa.gov.au/resource-centre/coag-reporting-framework-aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-policies-and [accessed 21 June 2024].

Source: ANAO analysis of NIAA documentation.

Table 3.17: Auditor-General Report No. 11 2020–21 Indigenous Advancement Strategy — Children and Schooling Program and Safety and Wellbeing Program

Source: ANAO analysis of NIAA documentation, including NIAA Annual Report 2019–20 and NIAA Corporate Plan 2020–21.

Table 3.18: Auditor-General Report No. 18 2021–22 Remote Housing in the Northern Territory

Note a: The Implementation Plan is a schedule to the National Partnership for Remote Housing Northern Territory (NPRHNT) with the purpose of providing details of how the NPRHNT is intended to be delivered. The Implementation Plan specifies performance benchmarks and milestones and associated payments.

Note b: The amendments, which related primarily to milestone payments, were identified before NIAA agreed to the recommendation in February 2022 and did not fully address the deficiencies in the Implementation Plan identified in Auditor-General Report No. 18 2021–22 Remote Housing in the Northern Territory. NIAA advised the ANAO in November 2021 that it intended to finalise amendments to the Implementation Plan in ‘early 2022’. (Auditor-General Report No. 18 2021–22 Remote Housing in the Northern Territory, paragraph 2.27.)

Note c: The NPRHNT expired on 30 June 2023. In February 2024, the Australian Government and the NT Government agreed to extend the NPRHNT to 30 June 2024.

Note d: Under the NPRHNT, capital works must be informed by local decision-making principles.

Note e: The Joint Steering Committee is a forum for monitoring the outcomes of the NPRHNT, consisting of representatives from the Australian Government, the NT Government, the four NT Land Councils (Northern Land Council, Central Land Council, Tiwi Land Council, and Anindilyakwa Land Council) and Aboriginal Housing NT, a peak body.

Source: ANAO analysis of NIAA documentation.

Timeliness

3.54 NIAA established implementation timeframes for seven of the 11 Auditor-General recommendations examined in this audit (see Table 3.6). Of these, the initial timeframe was met for one recommendation. Revised timeframes were established for five recommendations, of which three were met. For one recommendation, the timeframe was not met and a revised timeframe was not established. The time between when the recommendations were agreed by NIAA and when the recommendations were reported closed to the ARC ranged from three to 11 months.

Appendix 1 Entity responses

Indigenous Business Australia

National Indigenous Australians Agency

Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet

Appendix 2 Improvements observed by the ANAO

1. The existence of independent external audit, and the accompanying potential for scrutiny improves performance. Improvements in administrative and management practices usually occur: in anticipation of ANAO audit activity; during an audit engagement; as interim findings are made; and/or after the audit has been completed and formal findings are communicated.

2. The Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit (JCPAA) has encouraged the ANAO to consider ways in which the ANAO could capture and describe some of these impacts. The ANAO’s Corporate Plan states that the ANAO’ s annual performance statements will provide a narrative that will consider, amongst other matters, analysis of key improvements made by entities during a performance audit process based on information included in tabled performance audit reports.

3. Performance audits involve close engagement between the ANAO and the audited entity as well as other stakeholders involved in the program or activity being audited. Throughout the audit engagement, the ANAO outlines to the entity the preliminary audit findings, conclusions and potential audit recommendations. This ensures that final recommendations are appropriately targeted and encourages entities to take early remedial action on any identified matters during the course of an audit. Remedial actions entities may take during the audit include:

• strengthening governance arrangements;
• introducing or revising policies, strategies, guidelines or administrative processes; and
• initiating reviews or investigations.

4. In this context, the below actions were observed by the ANAO during the course of the audit. It is not clear whether these actions and/or the timing of these actions were planned in response to proposed or actual audit activity. The ANAO has not sought to obtain assurance over the source of these actions or whether they have been appropriately implemented.

Table A.1: Improvements observed by the ANAO

Appendix 3 Previous ANAO audits on implementation of recommendations

1. This is the seventh ANAO performance audit since 2019 that has examined the effectiveness of Australian Government entities’ implementation of agreed recommendations made by parliamentary committees and the Auditor-General. The previous audits are listed below.

• Auditor-General Report No. 6 2019–20 Implementation of ANAO and Parliamentary Committee Recommendations, which tabled in August 2019, examined four entities in the Agriculture and Infrastructure portfolios (Department of Agriculture; Airservices Australia; Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority; and Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Cities and Regional Development). Of the 23 recommendations examined in the audit, the ANAO found that six were implemented, 10 were partially implemented, three were not fully implemented and four were not implemented. The audit made four recommendations to improve governance and executive oversight of the implementation of recommendations. Three recommendations were directed to the audited entities, and one recommendation was directed to the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet to ‘reinforce the responsibility of accountable authorities to monitor and implement agreed parliamentary committee recommendations.’⁶³
• Auditor-General Report No. 46 2019–20 Implementation of ANAO and Parliamentary Committee Recommendations — Education and Health Portfolios, which tabled in June 2020, examined four entities (Department of Education; Department of Health; Australian Sports Commission; and National Health and Medical Research Council). The audit conclusion was that ‘Nothing came to the ANAO’s attention that the entities had not implemented applicable parliamentary committee and Auditor-General performance audit recommendations.’ The audit found that the entities had implemented all 33 recommendations examined in the audit. The audit also identified that ‘general arrangements to respond to, monitor and manage parliamentary committee recommendations required improvement.’⁶⁴
• Auditor-General Report No. 34 2020–21 Implementation of ANAO and Parliamentary Committee Recommendations — Department of Defence tabled in April 2021. Of the 32 recommendations examined in the audit, the ANAO found that 15 were implemented, six were largely implemented, four were partly implemented and seven were not implemented. The audit conclusion was that the Department of Defence had appropriate governance arrangements to respond to, monitor and implement Auditor-General performance audit recommendations, and partially appropriate governance arrangements for parliamentary committee recommendations.⁶⁵
• Auditor-General Report No. 25 of 2021–22 Implementation of Parliamentary Committee and Auditor-General Recommendations — Department of Home Affairs tabled in May 2022. Of the 25 recommendations examined in the audit, the ANAO found that 16 were implemented, two were largely implemented, three were partly implemented, one was not implemented, and three were ongoing. The audit conclusion was that the Department of Home Affairs had largely fit-for-purpose arrangements to respond to, monitor and implement agreed recommendations.⁶⁶
• Auditor-General Report No. 22 of 2022–23 Implementation of Parliamentary Committee and Auditor-General Recommendations — Attorney-General’s Portfolio, which tabled in May 2023, examined three entities (Attorney-General’s Department; Australian Federal Police; and Office of the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions). Of the 27 recommendations examined in the audit, the ANAO found that seven were implemented, six were largely implemented, six were partly implemented, two were not implemented, and six were ongoing. The audit conclusion was that the entities’ arrangements, processes and systems for responding to, monitoring, and implementing recommendations were mixed.⁶⁷
• Auditor-General Report No. 17 of 2023–24 Implementation of Parliamentary Committee and Auditor-General Recommendations — Department of Finance tabled in February 2024. Of the 18 recommendations examined in the audit, the ANAO found that eight were implemented, one was largely implemented, one was partly implemented, two were not implemented, and six were ongoing. The audit concluded that Finance had partly fit-for-purpose arrangements to respond to, monitor and implement agreed recommendations.⁶⁸

Appendix 4 Methodology for selecting recommendations in audit scope

1. For parliamentary committee recommendations, the ANAO identified parliamentary committee reports tabled since January 2020 that made recommendations related to Indigenous affairs or were directed at an entity in the Prime Minister and Cabinet portfolio which relates primarily to Indigenous affairs (see paragraph 1.16). For Auditor-General recommendations, the ANAO identified Auditor-General reports tabled since January 2020 where the auditee was an entity in the Prime Minister and Cabinet portfolio which relates primarily to Indigenous affairs.

2. For the purposes of this audit, an ‘agreed’ recommendation means the response to the recommendation:

• agreed in full or in part to the recommendation; or
• agreed in principle to the recommendation and included a commitment to undertake a specific action in response.

3. To allow sufficient time for implementation, the agreed recommendations examined in this audit were limited to recommendations contained in:

• parliamentary committee reports tabled prior to December 2022, where a government response was received prior to 31 December 2022; and
• Auditor-General reports tabled prior to December 2022.

4. The scope of this audit did not include:

• parliamentary committee reports where the subject of the report was either a review of annual reports, or an inquiry or review into proposed bills or delegated legislation; and
• any recommendations that substantially overlapped with another recommendation in the scope of this audit or were examined in another ANAO audit.⁶⁹

5. From a total of 71 recommendations, 31 recommendations were selected for inclusion in the audit scope, comprising 10 recommendations in three parliamentary committee reports and 21 recommendations in five Auditor-General reports. For details of the 25 recommendations examined in this report, see Appendix 5. Six Auditor-General recommendations from Auditor-General Report No. 25 2019–20 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Participation Targets in Major Procurements will be examined in a separate audit to be tabled in 2024–25 (see paragraph 1.27).

Appendix 5 Agreed parliamentary committee and Auditor-General recommendations

Table A.2: Agreed parliamentary committee recommendations to NIAA

Note a: Indicates the government’s response to the recommendation and any commitments that were additional to the recommendation’s intent.

Source: House of Representatives Standing Committee on Indigenous Affairs, Report on food pricing and food security in remote Indigenous communities and Australian Government response; House of Representatives Standing Committee on Indigenous Affairs, Report on Indigenous Participation in Employment and Business and Australian Government response; Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia, A Way Forward: Final report into the destruction of Indigenous heritage sites at Juukan Gorge and Australian Government response.

Table A.3: Agreed Auditor-General recommendations to IBAa

Note a: IBA agreed to all recommendations without qualification.

Source: Auditor-General Report No. 36 2020–21 Indigenous Business Australia’s Business Support and Investment Activities.

Table A.4: Agreed Auditor-General recommendations to NIAA^a

Note a: NIAA agreed to all recommendations without qualification.

Source: Auditor-General Report No. 34 2019–20 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Participation Targets in Intergovernmental Agreements; Auditor-General Report No. 11 2020–21 Indigenous Advancement Strategy — Children and Schooling Program and Safety and Wellbeing Program; Auditor-General Report No. 18 2021–22 Remote Housing in the Northern Territory.