On 9 May 2006, the Auditor-General advised the then Minister for Transport and Regional Services that he would undertake a performance audit and that the specific audit objectives and approach would be established once officers of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) had the opportunity to undertake preliminary enquiries with senior staff in Airservices Australia and the Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS). On 31 May 2006, the Auditor-General designated a performance audit under Section 18 of the Auditor-General Act 1997 (Auditor-General Act). The objectives of the performance audit were to: examine the development and administration by Airservices Australia of its contracts with the Solomon Islands Government for upper airspace management; assess the regularity of payments made under the contracts and steps taken by Airservices Australia in respect of any irregularities; and make recommendations for any improvements in the processes employed by Airservices Australia in developing and administering these and similar contractual arrangements.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of physical security arrangements in selected Australian Government agencies, including whether applicable Australian Government requirements are being met.

The audit sought to assess how well the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) manages aggressive tax planning. We did this by exploring the nature of aggressive tax planning and the ATO's approach to its management. In the latter context, we looked at:

• the ATO's previous experience with aggressive tax planning and action on previous significant external reviews, particularly dealing with mass marketed investment schemes;
• strategy and operations, intelligence gathering and use; and the identification and management of promoters given their significant role in aggressive tax planning.

The objective of the audit was to assess the adequacy and effectiveness of the BCM practices and procedures within the Tax Office in preparing for, or responding to, disruptions to ‘business as usual' operations.

The objectives of the audit were to evaluate the administrative systems and frameworks in Commonwealth organisations used in the management of risk and insurance. Specifically, the audit evaluated the adequacy and effectiveness of: the development and application of risk management and insurance frameworks and plans within organisations; organisations' records for the determination of risk treatments, including insurance cover; and procedures, and their application, for actively managing risk exposures and insurance experience.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of ARPANSA’s management of the regulation of Commonwealth nuclear, radiation facilities and sources, including ARPANSA’s compliance with its legislative requirements.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the ATO’s compliance management approach in the SME market.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Taxation Office’s management of its property portfolio.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of CSP’s feedback management system. CSP’s performance was assessed against the following criteria:

• CSP has appropriate channels to collect customer feedback;
• CSP effectively manages and resolves complaints; and
• CSP accurately reports on customer feedback, and analyses the information to improve aspects of child support administration.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Health and Ageing's administration of health workforce initiatives in rural and remote Australia.