The ANAO regards integrity as a core value of the organisation — critical in sustaining the confidence of Parliament, strengthening public trust in government and delivering quality audit products. Maintaining strong institutional integrity is critical to the operations and reputation of the ANAO.

The ANAO Integrity Framework provides an overarching structure to the integrity control system, supporting our institution’s integrity. The Framework serves to assist in ethical decision-making and risk, fraud and misconduct management.

Beyond its control system, the ANAO maintains an enduring focus on promoting integrity as a value that is embedded in our work and culture. The ANAO recognises that integrity demands quality not only in our products but also in the behaviours of our people.

The ANAO Integrity Advisor supports the effective and ongoing application of the Integrity Framework by providing advice to staff regarding integrity matters. The Integrity Advisor is responsible for increasing integrity awareness across the organisation and for reporting annually to the ANAO Executive Board of Management on actions taken under the Framework. The Auditor-General publishes the ANAO Integrity Report to provide increased transparency of the measures we undertake to maintain a high-integrity culture in the ANAO.

This audit was undertaken in response to a request from the Prime Minister concerning matters primarily relating to travel allowance claims made by a former minister. The focus of the audit was on the administration of travel claims under the current policy arrangements and did not examine alternative models, which may involve policy issues, which are clearly matters for Government.

On 16 May 2017, the Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet wrote to portfolio agency heads, including the Auditor-General, requesting some additional information on senior executive remuneration and highly paid individuals be published on websites by 31 July 2017. The request acknowledges that there is an increasing level of interest from the Parliament and the public to provide greater transparency of remuneration of senior executives and other highly paid officials.

The two tables below outline the cash remuneration at an aggregate level, within dollar ranges (or bands) for substantive senior executives and highly paid individuals, and show the numbers of employees within each band. The two tables will also be published in our audited financial statements which form part of our annual report. These notes are in addition to the information we must report in our financial statements on key management personnel remuneration under the accounting standards.

Major capital equipment contributes importantly to the capabilities of the Australian Defence Force (ADF) to achieve the Defence mission, that is, the defence of Australia and its national interests. The Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO) is the relatively new Defence organisation responsible for the acquisition and through-life support of Defence equipment and systems. DMO's stated purpose is to equip and sustain the ADF. In 2001-02, it will spend $2.9 billion on progressing some 270 major capital equipment acquisition projects. This preliminary study for the audit focused on DMO reporting on the status of major equipment acquisition projects.

The objectives of this audit were to assess, with respect to guarantees, indemnities and letters of comfort:

• changes in the size and nature of the Commonwealth's reported exposure since 30 June 1995;
• the extent of improvement in agencies' management and monitoring of the Commonwealth's exposure to these instruments;
• the approach of agencies to effective risk management and control of Commonwealth exposures to these instruments; and
• whether current reporting practices provide a sufficiently comprehensive coverage for public accountability purposes, at both the agency and whole of government levels.

Industry levies play a significant role in the provision of many public services and fund a range of activities undertaken by regulatory bodies such as the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA), through to financing reform of the Australian waterfront labour force. The objectives of this audit were to assess:

• the coverage, revenue and expenses of non-primary industry levies;
• the effectiveness of selected entities' financial management of non-primary industry levies; and
• areas of better administrative practice relating to the financial management of non-primary industry levies.

The objective of the performance audit was to assess the administrative effectiveness of DIMA's business entry program against the background of the Business and Temporary Entry program objective, with particular regard to whether:

• the existing performance management mechanisms and compliance monitoring strategies support the achievement of program outcomes and outputs;
• the quality of decision-making;
• business processes facilitate prompt visa decision-making consistent with program objectives; and
• decision-making support mechanisms promote robust and timely decision-making.

The audit examined the administrative effectiveness of arrangements between Health and HIC, in relation to the management and administration of the Medicare Benefits Scheme and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Health predominantly exercises a policy and leadership role within the health portfolio - HIC delivers a range of health services directly to the public and members of the health industry. Both agencies have stated that they recognise the importance of working together, as partners in their respective roles, to maximise their performance in the achievement of health portfolio outcomes and to discharge their respective responsibilities. This joint commitment is embodied in a written agreement - called the Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA).

The objective of the audit was to ascertain and report to the Parliament on the ATO's administration of PPS and to identify opportunities for improvement. Four key compliance issues were identified: reporting PPS income, claiming PPS credits, remitting PPS income, claiming PPS credits, remitting PPS deductions, and managing PPS exemptions and variations. In addition, the following key aspects were considered: PPS risk assessments, coordination of PPS administration between the Small Business Income and Withholding & Indirect Taxes business lines, and PPS compliance project performance information.

The purpose of the audit was to examine how efficiently and effectively the ATO managed its collection of outstanding tax debt. A framework for analysing the ATO's approach to collecting outstanding debt was established by the ANAO. This framework reflected five key criteria in the collection process as they apply to managing outstanding debt, namely:

• initiatives to promote timely payment;
• identification of outstanding debt;
• setting priorities for collecting outstanding debt;
• management of collection practices; and
• collection results.