Mr P.J. Barrett (AM) - Auditor-General for Australia, Address to ANZSOG Students at ANU

The objective of the audit was to review selected Defence public works projects submitted in the three year period ending mid 2007 to assess whether they had been submitted in accordance with the Committee's prevailing requirements for notification and review prior to entering into financial commitments for public works. The audit also examined the procedures applied by Defence to refer public works projects to the Committee, and identified administrative practices that may improve adherence with relevant legislative and administrative referral requirements.

The objective of this audit was to form an opinion on the Australian Research Council's (ARC's) management of research grants. To achieve this, ANAO centred the audit around the following aspects of ARC's grants administration: governance and structure, particularly the roles and responsibilities of those parties involved in administering ARC's grants (Chapter 2); the processes for assessing and selecting ARC grants (Chapter 3);post-award management of grants under the Funding Agreements (Agreements) between ARC and those universities that receive and administer the ARC grants to researchers (Chapter 4); and ARC's monitoring of its grant programs for management, performance improvement and reporting (Chapter 5). In its assessment, ANAO considered ARC's compliance with relevant sections of the Australian Research Council Act 2001 (ARC Act) and the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (FMA Act). The assessment also took account of the ANAO's Better Practice Guides, particularly the Better Practice Guide—Administration of Grants. The audit focused mainly on ARC's administration of Discovery Projects, the largest scheme in ARC's National Competitive Grants Program (NCGP).

Mr P.J. Barrett (AM) - Auditor-General for Australia, presented to the Central Agency Broker Seminar - Towards a Best Practice Australian Public Service - Hobart

Allegations were made to the Senate Economics References Committee that the Australian Taxation Office and Australian Customs Service (Customs) had failed to pursue several cases of detected sales tax fraud. The Committee believed that this alleged failure may have stemmed from coordination problems between the two agencies. The Committee requested the Auditor-General to investigate this matter and report his findings to the Parliament.

In January 2000, the ANAO published a Better Practice Guide (BPG) Business Continuity Management, Keeping the wheels in motion (the Guide). The Guide established that the objective of Business Continuity Management (BCM) is to ensure the uninterrupted availability of all key business resources required to support essential (or critical) business activities. This is achieved by organisations building resilience (controls and redundancy) into business operations to prevent, or minimise, the likelihood of business continuity risks occuring and, also, developing plans that minimise the impact should they occur. The primary objective of this audit was to examine BCM arrangements across four Commonwealth organisations, to assess whether their existing BCM frameworks ( or frameworks under development) exhibit the principles espoused in the Guide. At the Commonwealth - wide level, the ANAO considered the continuing relevance of the principles presented in the Guide.

The audit objective was to assess whether agreements between Australian Government (Commonwealth) agencies reflect sound administrative practices. To meet this objective, the audit reviewed current government policy and a range of better practice guidelines, conducted interviews with agencies and examined cross-agency agreements, to formulate suitable audit criteria and subsequently develop better practice principles.

The ANAO was invited to prepare a paper for an international conference on the role of supreme audit Institutions in combatting corruption for the advancement of transparency, public integrity, and good governance. The international conference formed part of the celebrations for the 30th anniversary of the establishment of the State Audit Office of Viet Nam and was held from 8-12 July 2024,

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of FaHCSIA's management of the Fixing Houses for Better Health program since 2005.

The audit reviewed the two elements of the program for which FaHCSIA is responsible: management of the service delivery arrangements and overall performance monitoring and reporting. Following the development of the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing, which introduced new approaches to the delivery of Indigenous programs, FaHCSIA made changes to FHBH for the 2009–11 phase. The audit has focused on both the 2005–09 and the 2009–11 phases. This provided coverage of the program's normal operations as well enabling the audit to consider the modifications made to the program for the
2009–11 phase.

Against this background, the audit considered whether:

• program management arrangements had been established that were suitable for the size, nature and objectives of the FHBH program;
• service delivery arrangements were designed to support the achievement of the program's objectives and FaHCSIA's management of the program; and
• FaHCSIA used robust systems to monitor achievement of the program objectives.

The ANAO also considered whether there was any experience from the department's management of FHBH that could be broadly applied to FaHCSIA's management of the National Partnership Agreement.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Public Service Commission's (APSC) administration of statutory functions relating to upholding high standards of integrity and ethical conduct in the Australian Public Service (APS).