The objective of this audit was to assess the Private Health Insurance Administration Council's (PHIAC's) administrative effectiveness as a regulator of private health insurance. In making this assessment, the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) addressed the following criteria: whether PHIAC monitored compliance with its legislative requirements and analysed related data; whether PHIAC addressed and managed non-compliance with its legislative requirements; and whether PHIAC's governance and organisation supported the performance of its legislative functions. Although the Department of Health and Ageing (Health) also has a role in the regulation of the private health insurance industry under the National Health Act 1953 (Health Act), Health's regulatory activities were outside the scope of this audit.

The objective of the audit was to assess the ATO's administration of the LMR. Specifically, the audit sought to: examine and report on aspects of LMR governance; assess the systems, processes and controls used by the ATO to capture and process LMR data reported by providers; examine the mechanisms and strategies the ATO uses to gain assurance that providers are complying with LMR legislation; and assess the mechanisms and strategies the ATO uses to promote awareness of, and enable access to, the LMR.

The objective of the audit was to assess the administrative effectiveness of the ATO's management of GST compliance in the large business market segment. In conducting the audit the ANAO examined three key areas: governance - ILEC's corporate planning and reporting arrangements relevant to the management of GST compliance in the large business market segment; assessing and identifying compliance risks- how ILEC collects information relating to the large business market segment and how it uses this information to support risk identification and assessment; and managing compliance- compliance planning and the products and processes used by ILEC to manage GST compliance in the large business market segment and evaluating compliance outcomes to support future compliance planning and the targeting of GST compliance risks. In undertaking the audit, the ANAO took account of the findings of previous reviews, in particular the LCCP Review.

The audit focussed on the systems and processes OGTR has established for both receiving and assessing applications under the Act, and also for ensuring compliance with the statutory requirements through monitoring and inspection. The audit objective was to form an opinion on the discharge by OGTR of selected functions entrusted to it under the Act. The audit assessed the practices of OGTR against the following principal criteria: Assessment of applications under the Act: Whether OGTR has established systems and procedures for the management and assessment of applications under the Act. Ensuring compliance—monitoring, inspection and enforcement activities: Whether OGTR has established systems and procedures for ensuring compliance with the requirements of the Act. Performance management: Whether OGTR manages selected aspects of its work efficiently and effectively. The audit did not seek to form an opinion on the appropriateness of the chosen structure of the regime for regulating gene technology or the merit of the scientific judgments involved. The audit methodology included discussions with representatives from agencies that co-ordinate aspects of the co-operative regulatory regime for gene technology across Australian jurisdictions, with various other stakeholders and users of the regime, as well as with officers of OGTR, along with examination of OGTR documents and files.

The objectives of this performance audit were to provide assurance that there were effective measures in place to safeguard the national collections and that institutions had processes in place to provide access to them. The ANAO also examined the extent to which the national cultural institutions have implemented the eleven recommendations from the previous report, Safeguarding Our National Collections (Audit Report No.8 1998-99).

The objective of the audit was to consider the status of workforce planning by APS agencies against the background of the ANAO's 2001 Better Practice Guide Planning for the Workforce of the Future, in light of there commendations made in the MAC Organisational Renewal 2001 and the Senate Finance and Public Administration References Committee report Recruitmentand Training in the Australian Public Service 2003. Workforce planning was defined as a continuous process of shaping the workforce to ensure it is capable of delivering organisational objectives now and in the future.

The objectives of the Australian National Audit Office's (ANAO) performance audit were to: examine the efficiency and effectiveness of agencies' procurement and management of legal services arrangements; determine adherence to Australian Government policy requirements; examine the effectiveness of the OLSC's monitoring of agencies' compliance with Government policy requirements; examine the OLSC's role in assisting agencies to comply with Government policy.

The objective of this audit was to the examine action taken by the ATO to improve TFN integrity, particularly through the implementation of the recommendations made in:Report No.37, taking into account any changed circumstances, or new administrative issues, affecting the implementation of those recommendations; and Numbers on the Run, taking into account that the Government has not formally responded to the report at this time.The audit also aimed to identify further opportunities for the ATO to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the TFN system. The report of this audit is necessarily detailed as it considers each of the recommendations and the extent to which they have been implemented.

The objective of the audit was to assess the ATO's administration of the Surcharge. Specifically, the audit sought to: report on the environment into which the Surcharge was introduced, including the legislative intent behind the Surcharge, and the current Surcharge environment; examine and report on aspects of Surcharge governance; assess the systems, processes and controls the ATO uses to: match Member Contributions Statements (MCS) data with income tax return data using Tax File Numbers (TFNs); process Surcharge information; and issue Surcharge liability assessments. assess the mechanisms the ATO uses to assess, classify, manage and rectify existing Surcharge exceptions, and prevent future exceptions from occurring; and examine the mechanisms and strategies the ATO uses to provide assurance that members and holders of contributions are complying with their Surcharge obligations.

The overal objective of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) audit was to determine the efficiency and effectiveness of the conversion to digital broadcasting by the national broadcasters. This encompasses, among other things, addressing the request from the former Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts (the Minister) for an audit of the actual cost of digital conversion, the sources of funds applied and the efficiency of funds utilisation. It also involved an examination of the broadcasters' management processes to deliver their Strategies and to 'minimise the call on the Budget'.

The objective of the audit was to examine the investment of public funds by selected entities, including: compliance with relevant legislation, delegations and instructions; the value for money of investment strategies; and reporting of investment activities. Six entities were selected for audit, comprising three FMA Act agencies and three Commonwealth authorities. The six entities had aggregrate investments of $1.64 billion as at 30 June 2004 and realised investment earnings of some $80.4 million during 2003/04.

The objective of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) was to examine how the ATO manages its responsibilities under the Taxpayers' Charter as an important element of its performance. This involved an examination of the ATO's: systems and processes used to develop, maintain and update the Charter; strategic commitment to implementing the principles of the Charter; integration of Charter principles with its business processes; and monitoring and reporting of its performance against commitments in the Charter.