Our staff add value to public sector effectiveness and the independent assurance of public sector administration and accountability, applying our professional and technical leadership to have a real impact on real issues.
The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of Agriculture’s and Customs’ arrangements for the targeting and screening of incoming international mail to identify prohibited and restricted goods.
In 2012–13, the ANAO pilot project to audit Key Performance Indicators(KPIs) was continued with the objective of conducting a review of framework developments, both in terms of the clarity of the policy and guidance issued by Finance and the performance of agencies in applying this policy and guidance, as a basis for implementing a future program of audits; and to further develop and test an audit methodology to address the practical challenges of assessing the appropriateness of KPIs, and their complete and accurate reporting.
The objective of this audit was to assess and report on the administration of the regional delivery of NHT 2 and the NAP.
The scope of the audit encompassed both Environment and DAFF, including the Joint Team of staff from both departments working together under a common management structure for the delivery of both programs. The audit focused on:
the implementation of the regional delivery arrangements;
governance and financial management for regional delivery; and
monitoring, evaluation and reporting on the programs' performance.
The current audit has focussed on Stage 2 of the Scheme. Its objective was to assess whether ACIS is being administered effectively by DIISR and, as relevant, by Customs. In particular, the audit examined the department's arrangements for:
assessing the eligibility of participants to receive duty credits;
calculating duty credits accurately and adhering to the funding limits for the Scheme;
checking the integrity of participants' claims, which are self-assessed;
accounting for the duty credits transferred to and used at Customs; and
measuring and reporting on the performance of ACIS.
The audit also followed up on whether the ANAO's previous recommendations have been addressed.
The objective of this follow up audit was to examine Customs' implementation of the eight recommendations in the ANAO Report No.16 2004–05 and the two related recommendations from JCPAA Report 404. The audit has had regard to issues affecting the implementation of the recommendations and has taken into account changed circumstances and new administrative arrangements since the previous audit.
The objective of this audit is to examine DIAC's implementation of the nine recommendations made in the earlier audit. The audit has also taken into account changed circumstances since the original audit. These include a heightened security environment after 11 September 2001 and the results of other relevant ANAO performance audit and financial statement work. The audit also examined ETA decision-making processes to gain assurance about its robustness in a changing risk environment. This issue came to attention in recent audits of visa management processes.
The objective of the audit was to assess the administrative effectiveness of Australian Customs Services (Customs) drug detection strategies for air and containerised sea cargo and small craft activity. Within the scope of the audit, the following areas were examined :
intelligence and law enforcement cooperation;
air and containerised sea cargo;
cargo examinations and technology;
small craft activities;
Customs funding arrangements (including funding for NIDS initiatives): and
The ANAO reviewed arrangements for the development of the department's fraud policy, fraud risk assessment and fraud control plan within the core functional areas of the department that are responsible for these activities. The audit also examined the operational procedures and guidelines that were in place to implement the department's fraud policy. The objective of the audit was to assess whether AFFA has implemented appropriate fraud control arrangements in line with the Fraud Control Policy of the Commonwealth and whether these arrangements operate effectively in practice.
This follow-up audit reviewed the operations of the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) which is responsible for ensuring the sustainable use and efficient management of Commonwealth fisheries resources. The objective of this follow-up audit was to assess the extent to which AFMA addressed the issues that gave rise to the recommendations of ANAO Report No.32 1995-96, and the related recommendations of the House of Representatives Standing Committee Report 1997, that were supported by the Government.
The follow-up audit focussed on the key issues identified in the recommendations and grouped these in the themes of:
strategic and performance management;
management of the advisory process;
implementation of fisheries management methods;
managing AFMA's environmental responsibilities as they relate to Commonwealth fisheries management;
compliance, monitoring and enforcement responsibilities; and
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.