The audit reviewed management of the Commonwealth's role in preparing for, and managing, pest and disease emergencies requiring a rapid response. The audit focused on the role of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry -Australia (AFFA), which is the Commonwealth Department with primary portfolio responsibility for coordinating the national and international response to an emergency. The audit did not address preventative measures such as quarantine and border controls; controlled release of exotic diseases or pests; or emergencies associated with previously known endemic diseases, food safety or chemical residue issues.

The objectives for the audit were to examine Commonwealth guarantees, indemnities and letters of comfort in relation to:

• the potential size of the Commonwealth's exposure to these instruments;
• the extent to which the overall exposures of the Commonwealth are managed and monitored;
• the adequacy of administrative reporting arrangements;
• areas of better administrative practice relating to their management; and
• to raise agencies' awareness of appropriate risk management and accountability practices in relation to these instruments.

The audit set out to quantify the Commonwealth's exposure to guarantees, indemnities and letters of comfort.

In two letters dated 19 and 22 June 2009, the Prime Minister requested a performance audit of a range of matters relating to representations to the Treasury regarding automotive finance arrangements for car dealers. In response to these requests, the Auditor-General decided that ANAO would undertake a performance audit under section 18 of the Auditor-General Act 1997 (Auditor-General Act). The audit objective, based on the matters raised in the Prime Minister's correspondence and in the Parliament, was to examine and report on:

• any representations to the Treasury since October 2008 from all sources regarding automotive finance arrangements for car dealers, including any made in relation to John Grant Motors;
• the nature of these representations;
• the manner in which the representations were responded to by officials, having regard to any relevant standards and procedures; and
• any related administrative matters that came to attention.

The Objective of the audit was to assess the administrative effectiveness of GPET's management of the general practice training programs, AGPT and PGPPP, the latter being a responsibility that GPET assumed in 2010.

The objectives of the audit were to determine whether FaCS and Centrelink had: a valid Business Case for the Edge project, as revised from time to time, including estimated costs, actual costs, and expected benefits; effective governance of the project, including reviews at critical points in the project and subsequent decisions to continue or, in the final analysis, to discontinue; an appropriate contract with SoftLaw, which was adequately managed; delivered appropriate advice on progress, project viability, and acceptable solutions to technical issues to Executive of FaCS and Centrelink during the project; and valid reasons for discontinuing the project. The ANAO began this audit in March 2004, four months after the Edge project was terminated, following the Auditor-General's agreement to a suggestion by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit that the project was a suitable subject for audit.

The audit reviewed the ATO's collection and management of activity statement information. The audit paid particular regard to:

• the environment into which activity statements were introduced;
• taxpayer concerns with activity statement administration;
• the mechanisms the ATO uses to capture and process activity statements;
• the change processes the ATO uses to change and test activity statement IT systems; and
• the management methodology used to report on, and assess the performance of, activity statement related systems and processes.

The objective of the audit was to ascertain how efficiently and effectively the ATO administers sales tax collections. The audit excluded an examination of the Australian Customs Service's sales tax administration, although it did examine coordination and liaison arrangements between the ATO and ACS. The audit approach involved analysing the ATO's performance against the five elements of the ATO's established compliance improvement process, namely:

• interpreting and clarifying sales tax law;
• identifying and understanding clients and markets (enabling tax officers to identify and analyse risks of non-compliance);
• providing education and information to clients regarding sales tax obligations, based on identified compliance risks;
• implementing administrative arrangements which ensure and/or assist taxpayers to meet their obligations; and
• detecting non-compliance and taking action to remedy instances of non-compliance.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether Centrelink's Balanced Scorecard (BSC) was based on key elements of better practice principles and its use assisted Centrelink to understand and communicate its performance against its strategic goals. The audit examined:

• the use of the BSC in setting Centrelink's vision and goals;
• the role of the BSC in planning;
• alignment of the BSC from the top down through the organisation and the interdependencies of scoreboards used by various support units, the definition and use of measures, including target setting and links to goals within the BSC framework; and
• its use in monitoring, reporting and feedback.

The objectives of the audit were to determine the administrative changes made by the Australian Tourist Commission (ATC) to implement the recommendations of recent administrative reviews and to identify how well the ATC is meeting its statutory objectives. The criteria used in conducting the audit included administrative improvements resulting from the ATC's response to recent reviews and the extent to which strategies and performance information address its statutory objectives.

Mr P.J. Barrett (AM) - Auditor-General for Australia, presentation to Macquarie University